Re: [Phys-l] Significant figures -- again

[brian whatcott <betwys1@sbcglobal.net>]

On 3/12/2012 9:33 PM, Bernard Cleyet wrote:
> On 2012, Mar 12, , at 19:12, John Denker wrote:
>
> > If I want to read about roundoff errors, I'm not going to rely on
> > some high-school physics text written by a highly skilled cartoonist.
> > I have other books, including books with "Numerical Methods" in the
> > title.  I also have my own quantitative observations to draw on.
>
> John, I think you unnecessarily pillory Paul.  I suspect he's caused many students to become physics majors and others to think physically. However, if you've tried to have him correct his texts' errors, and failed that's another matter.
Hmmmm....it seems to me the question of who should pillory whom is quite 
open.
The suggestion that when a student offers a length to numerous decimal 
places - far beyond the capability of any tool she has in hand - that 
this be taken to represent a sample mean is quite ludicrous. Paul could 
labor the point I suppose, by having a student or several students take 
numerous measurements of the object  in order to produce something that 
could more rightfully be called a distribution of the samples, so that 
the initially offered 2.345678 turns out to have a mean closer to 2.5, 
but life is short, and the curriculum is long.


Brian Whatcott