What is the meaning of a measurement expressed as 2.0 cm -/+ 0.05 cm?

AI Thread Summary
The expression 2.0 cm -/+ 0.05 cm indicates that the true measurement can vary within a range due to uncertainty. Specifically, this means the actual value lies between 1.95 cm and 2.05 cm. The discussion clarifies that the +/- notation represents the measurement's error margin, not a broader range. It emphasizes the importance of understanding statistical interpretation, suggesting a 68% probability that the true value falls within this range. Accurate interpretation of such measurements is crucial in scientific and technical contexts.
Quarlep
Messages
257
Reaction score
4
Hi I saw something in Wikipedia and I am confused. I saw something like this
2.0 cm -/+ 0.05 cm Whats that mean?
My first opinion Between 1,5 and 2,5
My second opinion 1,5 cm or 2,5 cm
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Quarlep said:
Hi I saw something in Wikipedia and I am confused. I saw something like this
2.0 cm -/+ 0.05 cm Whats that mean?
My first opinion Between 1,5 and 2,5
My second opinion 1,5 cm or 2,5 cm

It means the error is between the value written after -/+, so for example 1.0 km -/+ 0.5 km. That means we are not certain that the measurement is 1.0 km as given by whatever instruments we have. The real value can range between 1.5 km and 0.5 km.
 
Quarlep said:
Hi I saw something in Wikipedia and I am confused. I saw something like this
2.0 cm -/+ 0.05 cm Whats that mean?
My first opinion Between 1,5 and 2,5
My second opinion 1,5 cm or 2,5 cm

Your first thought ("between") is right, but have you dropped a decimal place in there? ##2.0{\pm}0.05## means between 1.95 and 2.05, not 1.5 and 2.5
 
I think of the +/- as the uncertainty in the measurement in a statistical sense. This may be a subtlety different view to that posted above. I don't interpret those bounds as definitely encompassing the 'true measurement'. Usually I'd take it to mean that there's a 68% chance (1 sigma) that the true measurement is in that range, assuming 'normal' statistics of course. Just my view, others may disagree!
 
Quarlep said:
Hi I saw something in Wikipedia and I am confused. I saw something like this
2.0 cm -/+ 0.05 cm Whats that mean?
My first opinion Between 1,5 and 2,5
My second opinion 1,5 cm or 2,5 cm

Seydlitz said:
It means the error is between the value written after -/+, so for example 1.0 km -/+ 0.5 km. That means we are not certain that the measurement is 1.0 km as given by whatever instruments we have. The real value can range between 1.5 km and 0.5 km.
As Nugatory points out, the error portion is ##\pm## 0.05. Also, the units involved are centimeters, not kilometers

Nugatory said:
Your first thought ("between") is right, but have you dropped a decimal place in there? ##2.0{\pm}0.05## means between 1.95 and 2.05, not 1.5 and 2.5
Quarlep, the measurement is between 1.95 cm and 2.05 cm.
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Back
Top