| | |||||||
| Register | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
| Chemistry Forum Chemistry Forum. Discuss chemical reactions, chemistry. |
| | LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
| |||
| |||
| Tony <[Only registered users see links. ]> wrote: Are you saying that a Spec 20 gives 4 sig figs such as 0.238 (and that 0.2385 is FIVE sig figs)? 0.238 has only THREE sig figs. I'm tempted to give you a "<--Sig. Figs. -1" stamp but you might come groveling for the point and say 'that's not what I meant'. So, I'll take off 1 point for lack of clarity instead. 0.238 = 2.38 x 10^-1 3 sig figs 0.0238 = 2.38 x 10^-2 3 sig figs 0.0000000238 = 2.38 x 10^-8 3 sig figs 2.38 = 2.38 x 10^0 3 sig figs 23.800 = 2.3800 x 10^1 5 sig figs 238000000000 = 2.38 10^11 3 sig figs 2380000000000.0 = 2.3800000000000 10^12 14 sig figs (compare: 2381043727094.3 has 14 sig figs) (I'd look up some physcial constants such as c or h, but I'm too tired.) Before I get shot at for my previous post, I discussed reading sig figs as a matter of accuracy, not precision. I'm ignoring all other aspects of the instrumentation and just want to test your meter reading skill. I could draw a bunch of pictures on paper and quiz you on the accuracy of your reading the correct value. ..54....|.........55..............56.. Or, I could dial in a voltage (54.3210 V) using a reliable source and quiz you on meter readings off of a dial calibrated in units "53 54 55 56". I would be looking for you to accurately report "54.3". On a meter calibrated in 0.1 V (54.0 54.1 54.2 ...), I'd be looking for "54.32". -- Sent by xanadoof from yahoo subpart of com This is a spam protected message. Please answer with reference header. Posted via [Only registered users see links. ] |
|
#2
| |||
| |||
| |
|
#3
| |||
| |||
| [Only registered users see links. ] (Sig Figure) wrote in message news:<[Only registered users see links. ].brandeis.e du>... Not Likely, Shorty. NFW = "No ****ing Way" soooo And The 5 refers to that digit at the end of 0.2385, *not* 5 Sig. Figs. I knew I should not use acronyms in posts. *sigh* Cheers, Tony |
| Tags |
| reading , scale , spectrophotomer |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
| | ||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Reading the spectrophotomer scale... | Mohammed Farooq | Chemistry Forum | 50 | 02-05-2004 04:21 PM |
| Reading the spectrophotomer scale... | Eppendorf | Chemistry Forum | 1 | 01-26-2004 02:27 PM |
| Reading the spectrophotomer scale... | Sig Figure | Chemistry Forum | 3 | 01-25-2004 12:34 PM |
| Reading the spectrophotomer scale... | Sig Figure | Chemistry Forum | 1 | 01-24-2004 02:52 PM |
| Reading the spectrophotomer scale... | Allan Adler | Chemistry Forum | 0 | 01-23-2004 06:02 PM |