At vero eos et accusamus et iusto odio dignissimos ducimus qui blanditiis praesentium voluptatum deleniti atque corrupti quos dolores et quas molestias excepturi sint occaecati cupiditate non provident, similique sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollitia animi, id est laborum et dolorum fuga. Et harum quidem rerum facilis est et expedita distinctio. Nam libero tempore, cum soluta nobis est eligendi optio cumque nihil impedit quo minus id quod maxime placeat facere possimus, omnis voluptas assumenda est, omnis dolor repellendus. Itaque earum rerum hic tenetur a sapiente delectus, ut aut reiciendis voluptatibus maiores alias consequatur aut perferendis doloribus asperiores repellat.
you should change to a common unit. Try meters
I tried \(\mu\)m
Well, we can just convert everything into meters and then add them. The mu m is micrometers and that is 1 millionth of a meter. So if you have 5.34x10^5, you have 534000 micrometers. But since micrometer is 1 millionth of a meter, you can say you have .534 meters. Once you have that meter conversion the others aren't that bad.
what is the answer?
to change units, set up ratios for example, to change 142.5 cm to meters you know you want to multiply by a ratio with meters up top and cm in the bottom (so the cm will "cancel") how many cm in 1 meter ? 100 cm/1 m but we want that upside down, 1 m /100 cm now do 142.5 cm * 1 m /100 cm = 1.425 meters
I know how to convert. However, I am dealing with significant figures also. That's why I choose \(\mu\) to do.
here what I did 1.80 *10^6 +14.25*10^6 + 0.534*10^6= 1.65*10^7
you should know there are 10e6 μm/ 1 m so 5.34* 10^5 μm * 1 m/10^6 μm= 5.34/10 m = 0.534 meters your problem is now 1.80m + 1.425 m + 0.534 m
You see, no matter what the unit we convert, the results should be the same. Ours are not.:(
yes, and do you want to bet who is correct ? for starters, your conversion from cm to μm is incorrect.
1.80m + 1.425 m + 0.534 m= 3.759 m
are you kidding me about "bet' ? If I have confidence on myself, I don't post that kind of question here, XD
however, what's wrong with my cm to \(\mu\)m?
your cm->μm is 10x too big
To me, it makes sense to convert to meters, because all the other distances are some factors of 10 different.
oh yes, I got my mistake, thanks a lot @phi
surely we should go the easiest way. I just want to practice the significant figure also.
to your result, for exactness, it should be 3.76m, right?
In this case 1.80 m is the most uncertain measurement so we should round to the nearest 100th of a meter (cm) 3.76 m sounds good.
Thank you very much.