Why we take the least # of significant digits when multiplying?

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter HuuChi1778
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Significant digits
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the rules for significant digits in multiplication and division versus addition and subtraction. Participants explore the reasoning behind using the least number of significant digits in multiplication and division, and the least number of decimal places in addition and subtraction, touching on concepts of precision and error propagation.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that significant digits reflect the precision of the data, with the least precise number determining the precision of the result in multiplication and division.
  • One participant proposes that when adding numbers, the result cannot be more precise than the least precise number involved, illustrated with an example of adding 5.1 and 5.20.
  • Another participant raises a question about how errors behave during multiplication, noting that multiplying errors can lead to a more precise result than the original values.
  • A participant discusses the concept of relative error and suggests that the number of significant digits used should correspond to the order of the relative error.
  • Some participants emphasize that rounding should only occur after all calculations are complete, and that intermediate results should retain additional significant figures to avoid compounding errors.
  • There is a mention of practical considerations in longhand arithmetic, where rounding off is necessary to manage the number of figures being calculated.
  • One participant notes that if more information about error distributions is available, explicit error propagation methods should be used instead of relying solely on significant figures.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express various viewpoints on the rules for significant digits and rounding, with no clear consensus reached. Some agree on the principles of precision and error propagation, while others contest the application of these rules in different contexts.

Contextual Notes

Participants discuss limitations related to the assumptions made about error distributions and the implications of rounding during calculations, but these aspects remain unresolved.

HuuChi1778
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
This question just flew right into my head when I was in the mid of a shower :), and I cannot resist finding out the answer. Question: Why do we take the least number of significant digits when multiplying/ dividing, and the least number of decimal places when adding/subtracting? Thank you!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Have you tried figuring the answer out for yourself? If so, what were your thoughts?
 
I do have a few ideas on this topic. I think that significant digits are there to determine the amount of precision of the given data. I believe that the reason why we take the least number of decimal places when adding and subtracting is because we cannot have a result that is more precise than the least precise number(s). For example, when adding 5.1 + 5.20, the answer should be 10.3. It is because the precision (+- 0.1) of the number 5.1 is less precise than the precision of the number 5.20 which is +- 0.01. However, I cannot think of a good reason why we apply the rule of rounding to the least number of significant digits instead round the number to the least decimal places. I would like an answer from an expert like you. Thank you!
 
Last edited:
What happens to the errors when multiplying?
 
That is a very tough question from you. I just did a quick check and realized that when we multiply the errors, in this case, 1x10^-1 and 1x10^-2. The result is 1x10^-3, which makes it even smaller. That means the result is more precise than it can actually be. Is that the reason why?
 
I suggest you think of it this way in terms of errors. A number is given by ##a \pm \delta a##. For multiplication purposes, it is more convenient to write this as ##a (1 \pm \delta a/a)##, here ##\delta a/a## is the relative error and essentially gives you an estimate on how many significant digits you should use. If ##\delta a/a## is (roughly) of order ##10^{-n}##, you use ##n## significant digits.

Adding two numbers gives you
$$
(a \pm \delta a) + (b \pm \delta b) = (a+b) \pm \delta a \pm \delta b = (a+b)\left( 1 + \frac{\pm \delta a \pm \delta b}{a+b}\right).
$$
Clearly, the larger of ##\delta a## and ##\delta b## here dominates the error and you should use the larger error (the number with the smaller number of decimals has the larger error) to determine how many decimals you can reasonably use.

Multiplying two numbers gives you
$$
(a \pm \delta a) (b \pm \delta b) = ab (1\pm\delta a/a)(1\pm\delta b/b) \simeq ab (1 \pm \delta a/a \pm \delta b/b),
$$
where we have assumed that the errors are relatively small so that the product of the errors is negligible. Clearly, the number with the larger relative error determines the error in the product.
 
HuuChi1778 said:
Why do we take the least number of significant digits when multiplying/dividing?

Actually you round to the least number of significant figures after multiplying/dividing. During the process itself I believe you keep one or two more significant figures (if you have them) than the least precise multiplicand/dividend/divisor contained in your product/quotient.
 
David Lewis said:
Actually you round to the least number of significant figures after multiplying/dividing. During the process itself I believe you keep one or two more significant figures (if you have them) than the least precise multiplicand/dividend/divisor contained in your product/quotient.
You never round your answer until all computations are done, regardless of the operation.
 
Orodruin said:
You never round your answer until all computations are done, regardless of the operation.
*gets up from his front porch chair and shakes his cane at the young whippersnappers walking by*. In my day...

If you are computing with longhand arithmetic, you will want to round off. Each multiplication would otherwise double the number of figures you are computing with and each division would likely result in an infinite string. If you are using a log or trig table in your handy CRC, those results are already rounded.

Edit: And if you are a whippersnapper, using a calculator or computer, you are almost certainly rounding off anyway. Which can bite you if you are unaware of it.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: David Lewis and CalcNerd
  • #10
jbriggs444 said:
*gets up from his front porch chair and shakes his cane at the young whippersnappers walking by*. In my day...

If you are computing with longhand arithmetic, you will want to round off. Each multiplication would otherwise double the number of figures you are computing with and each division would likely result in an infinite string. If you are using a log or trig table in your handy CRC, those results are already rounded.

I think "never" is accurate enough for a B-level thread in an age where people are using calculators and computing numbers with at most three significant digits ...
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: jbriggs444
  • #11
A number like 5.5 can be interpreted as 5.5 +- 0.05. So, if we add two numbers,
3.24 + 5.5
we are really adding
(3.24 +- 0.005) + (5.5 +- 0.05)
Now, if we don't have any additional information about the distributions of the errors, then we just use the rule of thumb where we "absorb" the smaller error into the larger one, and we get
8.74 +- 0.05
which is just 8.7

Now, as an exercise, try the same thing with multiplication.

By the way, if you do have more information about the distribution of errors, then you probably shouldn't use the rules of significant figures and instead use explicit propagation of errors.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
15K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
9K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
7K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K