The Gon. had to do it...
[flash width=420 height=315]//www.youtube-nocookie.com/v/vTUP3Yncx68?hl=en_US&version=3[/flash]
Paul is correct, I haven't worked in gons and didn't think this completely through. The number of divisions in a quarter circle is about three times as many for gons to 4 decimals as for degrees.
100.0000g is three times as precise as 90°00'00"
> Paul is correct... The number of divisions in a quarter circle is about three times as many for gons to 4 decimals as for degrees.
Yes, but surely it's still incorrect to equate least count with accuracy.
Accuracy is always the degree of closeness (or as those euro-hillbillies might say, dog-gon-ness of closeness) to the truth.
Precision has two meanings, depending on the context:
- Repeatability, as in standard deviation (or related statistical summary) of a group of measures. Closeness to each other, if you like.
- Least count, as in smallest unit of expression of a displayed value (or of a single measure). Closeness to zero, if you like.
So, since 1g = 9/10 of 1°, for any pair of angle values, expressed to the same count of decimal digits, the gon value has a smaller least count than the deg value, hence it is more precise.
Or, using mg (milligon) versus sec, since 1mg = 3.24" (or 0.1mg = 0.324"), the 100.0000g value has a smaller least count than the 90°00'00" value, hence it is more precise.
I Said Accurate, I Meant Accurate
Actually, the word you want is resolution.
Stephen
