lauri.tischler@efore.fi (Lauri Tischler)  wrote on 21.06.01 in <3B32280A.ADC08780@efore.fi>:

> Richard J Moore wrote:
> >
> > > 59.42886726469 ±2°C is obviously ludicrous, even if that's
> > > what my calculator gives me.  I should instead write 59 ±2°C, since
> >
> > So, if I follow you argument then shouldn't you be writing 58 ±2°C or
> > should it be 60 ±2°C ?
>
> What it means is that whatever dingus measured the temperature, reported
> the temperature as 59C.

Well, maybe. And maybe it reported the temperature as "76 units", where a  
unit is approximately 0.69°C, and zero units are approximately 6.99°C, and  
we happen to know the accuracy is 3 units.

(That makes out to 59.43 ±2.07°C, or 57.36 to 61.50°C, whereas 59 ±2°C  
works out to 57.00 to 61.00°C - they do overlap, but they're not the same.  
Now you might not care - but then again, you might care.)

MfG Kai