Unit conversions and significant digits

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around converting 100.0 kg to grams while maintaining significant digits. Converting to grams results in 100,000 g, which presents a challenge as it has 6 significant digits, while the original value has only 4. To accurately represent the significant digits, using scientific notation is suggested, such as 1.000 x 10^5 g, where the notation helps clarify the number of significant figures. Participants discuss the importance of marking significant digits and the utility of scientific notation to simplify larger numbers. The consensus emphasizes that while trailing zeros in scientific notation can be seen as placeholders, they are crucial for maintaining the integrity of significant figures.
jwj11
Messages
37
Reaction score
0
Let's us say I was given 100.0 kg of something.
That number has 4 significant digits.
Now let's say I wanted to convert that to grams.
It would be 100,000g.

but even if I write that as 100,000. it would be 6 significant digits.
Is my only option for this case to write it in scientific notation?

SO it would be 1.000*10^5 g
Right?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
you can put a line above the last zero that you want to be significant
 
So just mark the second 0 from the right for 10,000 to make a mental note that it only has 4 significant digits?

But my methodology for using scientific notation is correct too right?
Could you please explain a bit more about what you meant by that dranseth.
 
jwj11 said:
Let's us say I was given 100.0 kg of something.
That number has 4 significant digits.
Now let's say I wanted to convert that to grams.
It would be 100,000g.

but even if I write that as 100,000. it would be 6 significant digits.
Is my only option for this case to write it in scientific notation?

SO it would be 1.000*10^5 g
Right?

In your calculations you can write out the 100,000 but as the number gets bigger it is best to use scientific notation so you have less digits to write out.
so 100,000 would be 1.0*10^5 g
 
jwj11 said:
So just mark the second 0 from the right for 10,000 to make a mental note that it only has 4 significant digits?

But my methodology for using scientific notation is correct too right?
Could you please explain a bit more about what you meant by that dranseth.

I'll give you an example

10,000

see where the 0 is underlined? Flip it so that line is on top of the 0 instead of on the bottom
 
rock.freak667 said:
In your calculations you can write out the 100,000 but as the number gets bigger it is best to use scientific notation so you have less digits to write out.
so 100,000 would be 1.0*10^5 g

Ok when you did that you are left with 2 significant digits.
The original was 4.
Is that ok to do it that way?
 
jwj11 said:
Ok when you did that you are left with 2 significant digits.
The original was 4.
Is that ok to do it that way?

Well my deal with scientific notation is to reduce the number of decimal places.( Not sure if I am correct with what I am about to say)

But 100,000=1*10^5
I usually regard the trailing zero's as placeholders so that if I have to write it in scientific notation I would write 1.0*10^5 to 2sf. Or else I would have to write 1.000 *10^5 which in my eyes would be pointless to do (write 1.000 that is)
 
Back
Top