- #1

- 6

- 0

## Main Question or Discussion Point

Why do we use significant figures in calculations instead of the rate of Uncertainty?

(2,5[tex]\pm[/tex]0,4000)*4,000=(10[tex]\pm[/tex]1,6).

The number 2,5 has 2 significant figures, wich is the same as we will write in the answer, while it should be only one significant figure in the answer if we take the rate of uncertainity into account.

If the rate of uncertainity rises when you multiplices numbers that are bigger than 1.

Then why don't write the rate of uncertainity in the calculations?

My point is that it seems stupid to use significant figures instead of the rate of uncertainty in multiplication as the real answer could be far from the answer you would get with significant figures. You won't know how far away your answer could be and sometimes that's neccesary knowledge... am I wrong?

I'm a little confused over this please tell me if I'm wrong somwhere and why. Thank you :)

(2,5[tex]\pm[/tex]0,4000)*4,000=(10[tex]\pm[/tex]1,6).

The number 2,5 has 2 significant figures, wich is the same as we will write in the answer, while it should be only one significant figure in the answer if we take the rate of uncertainity into account.

If the rate of uncertainity rises when you multiplices numbers that are bigger than 1.

Then why don't write the rate of uncertainity in the calculations?

My point is that it seems stupid to use significant figures instead of the rate of uncertainty in multiplication as the real answer could be far from the answer you would get with significant figures. You won't know how far away your answer could be and sometimes that's neccesary knowledge... am I wrong?

I'm a little confused over this please tell me if I'm wrong somwhere and why. Thank you :)

Last edited: