![]() |
|
|
#1 |
|
"Lucan"
Dec 2006
England
145128 Posts |
One of the first series of lectures I attended at Oxford
was "Errors", and delivered most enjoyably. He employed a clock which could count microseconds to determine the period of a pendulum. He mentioned that the clock cost about the same as an E-type Jaguar, and invited us to guess which of the two items he would choose. I assume you can date me by that anecdote. The point I want to make is that many folk (reasonably) moan when a quantity is quoted to an unwarranted number of figures. However, if (as physicists routinely do) you quote a standard deviation with your result, the greatest sin is to drop the precision of the calculation prematurely. David |
|
|
|
![]() |
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| computer accuracy | lfm | Puzzles | 34 | 2009-11-10 15:41 |
| CPU Credit Accuracy | g0vegan | PrimeNet | 1 | 2008-11-04 20:26 |
| Verify Accuracy of Test | Numbers | PrimeNet | 8 | 2005-07-31 08:16 |
| Calculating sieving % accuracy | amcfarlane | Math | 3 | 2005-01-02 19:34 |
| Accuracy of our work [k*2^n-1, k<300] | Kosmaj | 15k Search | 87 | 2004-11-13 09:35 |