0
Adding numbers using only the significant digits can introduce inaccuracies, for example if you are adding pi ten times using 4 decimal places of pi the answer is 31.416 but the right answer is 31.4159 . .
Subtracting can give quite bad errors especially when two nearly equal numbers are subtracted. So for subtraction it's best to use more significant figures and round the answer to the required number of digits afterwards.
Wiki User
∙ 10y ago
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
How many significant digits are in the measurement in 0.37010 meters?
The significant digits are: 3701; so there are four such digits in the measurement. These are the digits that convey the degree of precision included. Leading zeroes and trailing zeroes do not add such meaning.
How do you find the sum of digits of each number?
Add the digits together. The sum of the digits of 23 is 5.
Is it true significant digits are the number of digits that reflect the precision of a measurement or number?
No, it is not true. They reflect the precision of the number in the context of its use. If required to calculate the population density of Greater London in 2011, I would use the population in millions - not because that is the limit of the accuracy of the census results but because greater accuracy does not add significant value to the precision of the population density.
What number has 2 in the tens place and digits add to 5?
7
What do you notice when you add the digits of the product of 9 and another number?
They add up to 9
Add the following using significant digits 3.521G plus 0.0046G?
3.5g
What is the sum of 2.7g and 2.47g exspressed in the correct number of significant digits?
5.2g When you add or subtract using significant figures, you round the answer to the fewest number of decimal places as the measurement with the fewest decimal places.
How do you add a 4 digit and a 3 digit number?
Add the least significant digits (carry any thing greater than the base)Add the carry and the next least most significant digits, (carry anything greater than the base)Add the third most significant digits, (carry anything greater than the base)Add the carry to the most significant digit.Done
What is 124.683 to 2 significant digits?
124.68 significant figures means figures after the decimal, in the case after the 8, if the number after the significant figure is 4 or lower the last SF (significant figure) stays the same, if 5 or higher then you add one. for example the number 124.683 to one SF is 124.7, because 8 means you round the last number up (add one) * * * * * The above answer could no be more incorrect! It has confused decimal digits with significant digits. 124.683, to 2 sig digits is 120. The two non-zero numbers 1 and 2 and everything else 0.
When you add or subtract what is the rule for determining the number of significant figures in the answer?
= significant figures = and got For addition and subtraction, the result should have as many decimal places as the measured number with the smallest number of decimal places.
How many significant digits are in the measurement in 0.37010 meters?
The significant digits are: 3701; so there are four such digits in the measurement. These are the digits that convey the degree of precision included. Leading zeroes and trailing zeroes do not add such meaning.
How many significant digits are in 39000?
Some persons consider as significant digits only 3 and 9; I think that is more correct to consider as significant digits 3,9,0,0,0. Other propose to add bars or points (as 39000.) for distinction but this system is not practically used.
How do you know if a number is in the 9 times table?
if you add the digits of the number such as 81 8+1=9 every time, the digits of the number will add up to 9
What If you add a mass of 3.7 g to a mass of 9.495 g the sum with the correct number of significant digits is?
It is 13.2 grams.
How do you find the sum of digits of each number?
Add the digits together. The sum of the digits of 23 is 5.
Is it true significant digits are the number of digits that reflect the precision of a measurement or number?
No, it is not true. They reflect the precision of the number in the context of its use. If required to calculate the population density of Greater London in 2011, I would use the population in millions - not because that is the limit of the accuracy of the census results but because greater accuracy does not add significant value to the precision of the population density.
What is the next year in which all its digits add up to a prime number?
2014 ( The sum of the digits = 7, a prime number )
