/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.1051337]

>Chem exam

>Find new freezing point of substance.

>Answer -3.30 C

>Actual answer was -3.3 C

>My face when sigfigs

[Anonymous No.1051343]

Problem is what?

[Anonymous No.1051348]

did you get points substracted?

if so, go to prof, write 3.3 = 3.30 and make him prove differently

[Anonymous No.1051349]

Well... huh?

[Anonymous No.1051354]

>>1051348
>>1051343
>>1051349
Significant figures, you fuck. SIGNIFICANT. Get outta /sci/ if you think they ain't.

[Anonymous No.1051356]

>chem exam
>lab to identify substance
>identify it by comparing all multiple choice answers
>fuck the lab
>my face

[Anonymous No.1051358]

Siginificant numbers and unsure numbers can gtfo... seriously

[Anonymous No.1051362]

>>1051354
Adding the zero on the end is only significant if you've rounded 3.295 up to 3.30.

[Anonymous No.1051368]

lol i hated significant figures

[Anonymous No.1051373]

Only faggots use significant figures.

Real men give a confidence interval.

[Anonymous No.1051383]

>>1051348
x = 3.3
3.25 ≤ x < 3.35

y = 3.30
3.295 ≤ y < 3.305

[Anonymous No.1051390]

>>1051383
I think you mean 3.295 ≤ y ≤ 3.305

[3rdyearChemfag !Zm8pCdtzww No.1051396]

>>1051373
>implying IUPAC doesnt have guidelines for sig figs of confidence intervals.

you cannot escape the sig fig.

ever

[Anonymous No.1051403]

>>1051390
No.

y = 3.305 will give y = 3.31 in 3 significant numbers.

[Anonymous No.1051407]

Significant figures

[Anonymous No.1051413]

>>1051403
Hell, no.

5 always rounds to the closest even figure, not up.

[Anonymous No.1051420]

>>1051396
>implying 3.3(1) and 3.3(6) are the same thing

[Anonymous No.1051421]

>>1051413
wat

[Anonymous No.1051434]

>>1051421
Read up on statistical rounding, it's done that way to avoid biasing towards higher values.