What is the Fahrenheit equivalent of 62.0 °C?

  • Thread starter Thread starter protractor
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Temperature
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around converting a temperature of 62.0 °C to its Fahrenheit equivalent, specifically focusing on the implications of significant figures in the conversion process. Participants explore the application of the temperature conversion formula and the treatment of exact numbers versus measured values.

Discussion Character

  • Homework-related
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents the conversion formula and calculates the Fahrenheit equivalent as 143.60°F, expressing confusion about significant figures.
  • Another participant suggests that both 32°F and the factor 1.8 have three significant figures, recommending that the answer should also maintain three significant figures.
  • Some participants assert that 32 and 1.8 are exact numbers, implying they have an infinite number of significant figures.
  • There is a discussion about whether the final answer should be 143.6°F or 144°F, with considerations of how significant figures and decimal places affect the result.
  • One participant proposes that the initial significant figures of the measured temperature (62.0) should dictate the significant figures in the final answer.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on how to handle significant figures in the conversion, with no consensus reached on whether the final answer should be 143.6°F or 144°F.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference the treatment of exact numbers and significant figures, but there is no resolution on the correct application of these concepts in this specific case.

protractor
Messages
17
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


Convert 62.0 °C to Fahrenheit

Homework Equations


°F=1.8(°C) +32

The Attempt at a Solution


°F=1.8(62.0) + 32 = 143.60

I am confused on the significant figures for the answer. Does the temperature equal 143.6°F because 32 is an exact number?
Or 144°F because 32 is not exact (part of temperature conversion formula)?

In the book (Chemistry Tro 6th edition) Exact numbers include "Integral numbers that are part of an equation" such as
radius =diameter/2, the number 2 is exact.

thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I would assume 32 F is to three significant figures and that the 1.8 factor is also three (or more?) significant figures. I would keep three significant figures in the answer.
 
In this case 32 and 1.8 are exact numbers (with an infinite number of significant zeros).
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: protractor
Borek said:
In this case 32 and 1.8 are exact numbers (with an infinite number of significant zeros).
Worth going with that.
The temperature values themselves are measurements, so you would go only as far as how they are reported or given.
 
Ok 32 and 1.8 are exact numbers. So when I first multiply and then add will it become 143.6°F or 144°F? I thought it might be 143.6 because, even though the numbers are exact, the final step is adding (basing on decimal places). Or is it based on initial significant figures with the temperature starting with 3 significant digits.
 
protractor said:
Ok 32 and 1.8 are exact numbers. So when I first multiply and then add will it become 143.6°F or 144°F? I thought it might be 143.6 because, even though the numbers are exact, the final step is adding (basing on decimal places). Or is it based on initial significant figures with the temperature starting with 3 significant digits.
°F=1.8(62.0) + 32 = Infinite sigfigs on 1.8 and on 32 but only 3 sigfigs on 62.0

F=111.6+32.000000000000000000

F=143.6

It is fair to say 143.6, but probably better to view the computation going as F=112+32.00000=144;
the first term became limited to 3 significant figures, so adding the next term should not change that.
Better then, to say F=144
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: protractor
Thank you! I got it.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
15K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
8K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
14K