[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index]

Re: Numerical accuracy/precision - this is a bug or a feature?

• To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
• Subject: [mg120187] Re: Numerical accuracy/precision - this is a bug or a feature?
• From: "slawek" <slawek at host.pl>
• Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2011 06:58:51 -0400 (EDT)
• References: <ius5op$2g7$1@smc.vnet.net> <ius7b6$30t$1@smc.vnet.net> <iv6gf9$ruo$1@smc.vnet.net>

U¿ytkownik "Noqsi" <noqsiaerospace at gmail.com> napisa³ w wiadomo¶ci grup 
dyskusyjnych:iv6gf9$ruo$1 at smc.vnet.net...
> On Jul 7, 5:40 am, "slawek" <sla... at host.pl> wrote:
>
>> The convention that 2.0 is less accurate than 2.00 is applied ONLY in
>> Mathematica (the computer program).
>
> Not true. This is a long-standing convention in experimental science.

There is no such convention. There is always possible that 2.00 +- 0.53 .

Nobody should believe that 2.00 is more exact than 2.0 or even 2 . (If so, 
then 2 Pi have got 10% std. dev. ;)