Re: [Phys-l] Sig figs

[John Denker <jsd@av8n.com>]

On 10/14/2010 09:12 AM, Rauber, Joel wrote:
> John —  I am curious as to your opinions regarding the Journal of
> Chemical Education
>
> http://pubs.acs.org/doi/pdfplus/10.1021/ed068p400
>
> article that you provided us.  Do you agree whole heartedly with the
> proposal of what to teach in the article?  Agree with some
> reservations?  Would change the proposal? Etc.

Proposal?  What proposal?  I do not find that word in the article
anywhere.  As to roundoff methods, several are considered, all of
which are found wanting.

As to the more general question, as is usually the case, the article
makes several points, some of which I agree with more than others.
 *) I agree that the sig figs rules one finds in the textbooks are 
  absurd.
 *) I agree that students often do figure this out, sometimes in
  the first week of class, sometimes later.
 *) I agree that this undermines the relationship of trust between
  student and teacher.
 *) I agree that the students sometimes get rather snarky about it.
 *) As for "proposals", I would fault the article for not providing
  specific, constructive proposals for handling the underlying issues
  including
   -- roundoff
   -- representation of uncertainty
   -- propagation of uncertainty

If that doesn't answer the question, please ask a more specific question.

Also, if you really want to know what I think about the subject, you can
read
  http://www.av8n.com/physics/uncertainty.htm