Interesting(?) BIT-appeal
#81
Posted 2020-March-06, 10:42
Read MSC- and CtC-type columns, they generally use vague logic like "I think slam is at worst on a finesse" or "I hope partner will be able to supply a stopper". And these are some of the best players in the world.
#82
Posted 2020-March-06, 16:48
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean
#83
Posted 2020-March-07, 03:03
blackshoe, on 2020-March-06, 16:48, said:
#85
Posted 2020-March-07, 17:17
pran, on 2020-March-07, 04:49, said:
Oxford American Dictionary said:
noun
1 a number, especially one which forms part of official statistics or relates to the financial performance of a company: official census figures | a figure of 30,000 deaths annually from snakebite.
• a numerical symbol, especially any of the ten in Arabic notation: the figure 7.
• one of a specified number of digits making up a larger number, used to give a rough idea of the order of magnitude: their market price runs into five figures | [in combination] : a six-figure salary.
• an amount of money: a figure of two thousand dollars.
• (figures) arithmetical calculations: she has no head for figures.
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean
#87
Posted 2020-March-08, 02:38
pran, on 2020-March-07, 20:49, said:
America isn’t England, hasn’t been for almost 250 years. It’s a miracle that the languages don’t differ much more. Dutch Dutch and South African Dutch, better known as Afrikaans, have grown far more apart in a slightly shorter time span. I know, totally and completely OT.
#88
Posted 2020-March-08, 05:15
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean
#89
Posted 2020-March-08, 08:22
pran, on 2020-March-07, 04:49, said:
The term I was taught is “significant figures” as opposed to “decimal places”. Looking online, that still seems to be valid usage.
London UK
#90
Posted 2020-March-08, 09:43
gordontd, on 2020-March-08, 08:22, said:
Just for curiosity I looked up my Webster (American language) where I found some 14 entries for the noun.
Most relevant seemed to be "symbol for a number" or "amount"
#91
Posted 2020-March-08, 10:07
gordontd, on 2020-March-08, 08:22, said:
I too was taught that term, but the only difference I can see with respect to "decimal places" is an explicit reminder that we are rounding to a sufficient level of accuracy (so it's reasonable to express the generic frequency of an 8500 shape as 0.00% to two significant places, even knowing that it is 0.0031%).
#92
Posted 2020-March-08, 14:27
gordontd, on 2020-March-08, 08:22, said:
"Decimal places" just refers to the digits after the decimal point. "Significant figures" is the total number of digits. 123.45 has 5 significant figures and 2 decimal places.
#94
Posted 2020-March-09, 02:44
pran, on 2020-March-09, 01:29, said:
Since we are completely OT, I think it’s high time we discuss when to use number or figure. Please, don’t restrict yourself to natural numbers, complex, rational, real are far more interesting.
#95
Posted 2020-March-09, 04:01
sanst, on 2020-March-09, 02:44, said:
Well, for what it's worth: To me number is a concrete term, figure is an abstract term. They can both be used about measurable quantities.
#96
Posted 2020-March-09, 05:41
barmar, on 2020-March-08, 14:27, said:
Yes. My point was that I was taught "s.f." at the same time as being taught "d.p." It sounds to me as though perhaps Pran was taught "s.d." instead of "s.f."
London UK
#97
Posted 2020-March-09, 06:10
pran, on 2020-March-09, 01:29, said:
What you say may be logical but at school many of us were taught a distinction between decimal places and significant figures, and tedious exercises rounding numbers to 3d.p. (decimal places) or to 4s.f. sigificant figures.
"Robin Barker is a mathematician. ... All highly skilled in their respective fields and clearly accomplished bridge players."
#98
Posted 2020-March-09, 07:48
If you use a poll of 4 people whether 1 in 6 (or 1 in 5) players would chose an action, the result will have 0 (zero) significant figures.
Rik
The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds the new discoveries, is not “Eureka!” (I found it!), but “That’s funny…” – Isaac Asimov
The only reason God did not put "Thou shalt mind thine own business" in the Ten Commandments was that He thought that it was too obvious to need stating. - Kenberg
#99
Posted 2020-March-09, 08:51
gordontd, on 2020-March-09, 05:41, said:
Indeed.
A significant number to me refers to one (or more) 'significant' number(s) within a set of numbers, not to the internal properties of any particular number.
So if you for instance consider the population (expressed as a number) of the US states you might end up ranking the states according to their significance.
There you have an example of significant numbers.
Examples:
98765,43210 is a 10-digit number with 5 decimals.
98765,4321 is the same number with only 4 significant decimals (note the omission of the last zero!).
98765 is the same number with 5 significant digits.
and 99000 is again the same number with only 2 significant digits. (note the rounding of the thousands!)
#100
Posted 2020-March-09, 09:18