Converting Uncertainty in Millimeters to Meters for Radius Calculation

  • Thread starter Thread starter rainstom07
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Uncertainty
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on converting a measured diameter of 3.681 mm with an uncertainty of ±0.005 mm into meters for radius calculation. The radius is calculated as 0.0018405 m after converting the diameter to meters and dividing by two. The uncertainty in meters is found to be ±0.0000025 m using the same conversion method. Participants suggest considering percentage uncertainty for clarity, as it simplifies understanding regardless of units. The conversion and uncertainty calculations are confirmed as correct.
rainstom07
Messages
15
Reaction score
0
In a lab, i used a micro-caliper to measure the diameter of an indicator; I got 3.681 mm \pm 0.005 mm. However, i need the measurement to be in meters and i need to divide the measurement by 2 (as i need the radius, not diameter) for easy calculations. I know how to convert the 3.681 mm to meters, but what about the uncertainty?

radius of indicator:
3.681 mm * \frac{1 m}{1000 mm} * \frac{1}{2} = 0.00184\underline{0}5 m

uncertainty?:
\pm 0.005 mm * \frac{1 m}{1000 mm} * \frac{1}{2} = 0.00000\underline{2}5 m

Is this right?

Thanks in advance.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes. It is easier to understand if you think of the uncertainty in terms of percentage uncertainty. Then the units don't matter.
 
So I know that electrons are fundamental, there's no 'material' that makes them up, it's like talking about a colour itself rather than a car or a flower. Now protons and neutrons and quarks and whatever other stuff is there fundamentally, I want someone to kind of teach me these, I have a lot of questions that books might not give the answer in the way I understand. Thanks
I am attempting to use a Raman TruScan with a 785 nm laser to read a material for identification purposes. The material causes too much fluorescence and doesn’t not produce a good signal. However another lab is able to produce a good signal consistently using the same Raman model and sample material. What would be the reason for the different results between instruments?
Back
Top