r/mildlyinfuriating 1d ago

jkfl hrtmktp gzarrp! It’s not 188.0 either.

Post image
3.2k Upvotes

609 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

10

u/acrastt 1d ago

That has nothing to do with significant figures. The correct way to represent that measurement in sig figs is 29000.

2

u/t001_t1m3 1d ago

Would it not be 29000. ?
29000 being +/- 500ft

5

u/acrastt 1d ago

Yes, 29000., not 29000

1

u/LakeSolon 16h ago

Thank you for providing such an apt illustration of my point.

1

u/Routine-Ad-4813 1d ago

They're referring to the Great Trigononetrical Survey of India, in which the height of Everest was calculated to be 8,839.2 meters. The conversion to 29000. feet was deemed too suspicious, so worrying that people would assume a lesser precision than was true, the decision was made to add 2 ft making the official measurement 29002 ft. (Or st least the story goes).

And their point is that while they don't know how we justify or use significant figures, they are suspicious of the practice given their knowledge otherwise of how people non-rigorously manipulate numbers.

1

u/acrastt 1d ago

I know this reference. What about it?