as far as 6 places of decimals?—Answer, ·318310, ·367879, and 1989·209221.

Calculate 10 terms of each of the following series, as far as 5 places of decimals.

1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + &c. = ·71824.
2 2 × 32 × 3 × 42 × 3 × 4 × 5
1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + &c. = 2·92895.
2 3 4 5
80 + 81 + 82 + 83 + 84 + &c. = 9·88286.
8182838485

151. We now enter upon methods by which unnecessary trouble is saved in the computation of decimal quantities. And first, suppose a number of miles has been measured, and found to be 17·846217 miles. If you were asked how many miles there are in this distance, and a rough answer were required which should give miles only, and not parts of miles, you would probably say 17. But this, though the number of whole miles contained in the distance, is not the nearest number of miles; for, since the distance is more than 17 miles and 8 tenths, and therefore more than 17 miles and a half, it is nearer the truth to say, it is 18 miles. This, though too great, is not so much too great as the other was too little, and the error is not so great as half a mile. Again, if the same were required within a tenth of a mile, the correct answer is 17·8; for though this is too little by ·046217, yet it is not so much too little as 17·9 is too great; and the error is less than half a tenth, or ¹/₂₀. Again, the same distance, within a hundredth of a mile, is more correctly 17·85 than 17·84, since the last is too little by ·006217, which is greater than the half of ·01; and therefore 17·84 + ·01 is nearer the truth than 17·84. Hence this general rule: When a certain number of the decimals given is sufficiently accurate for the purpose, strike off the rest from the right hand, observing, if the first figure struck off be equal to or greater than 5, to increase the last remaining figure by 1.

The following are examples of a decimal abbreviated by one place at a time.

3·14159, 3·1416, 3·142, 3·14, 3·1, 3·0
2·7182818, 2·718282, 2·71828, 2·7183, 2·718, 2·72, 2·7, 3·0
1·9919, 1·992, 1·99, 2·00, 2·0

152. In multiplication and division it is useless to retain more places of decimals in the result than were certainly correct in the multiplier, &c., which gave that result. Suppose, for example, that 9·98 and 8·96 are distances in inches which have been measured correctly to two places of decimals, that is, within half a hundredth of an inch each way. The real value of that which we call 9·98 may be any where between 9·975 and 9·985, and that of 8·96 may be any where between 8·955 and 8·965. The product, therefore, of the numbers which represent the correct distances will lie between 9·975 × 8·955 and 9·985 × 8·965, that is, taking three decimal places in the products, between 89·326 and 89·516. The product of the actual numbers given is 89·4208. It appears, then, that in this case no more than the whole number 89 can be depended upon in the product, or, at most, the first place of decimals. The reason is, that the error made in measuring 8·96, though only in the third place of decimals, is in the multiplication increased at least 9·975, or nearly 10 times; and therefore affects the second place. The following simple rule will enable us to judge how far a product is to be depended upon. Let a be the multiplier, and b the multiplicand; if these be true only to the first decimal place, the product is within (a + b)/20[19] of the truth; if to two decimal places, within (a + b)/200; if to three, within (a + b)/2000; and so on. Thus, in the above example, we have 9·98 and 8·96, which are true to two decimal places: their sum divided by 200 is ·0947, and their product is 89·4208, which is therefore within ·0947 of the truth. If, in fact, we increase and diminish 89·4208 by ·0947, we get 89·5155 and 89·3261, which are very nearly the limits found within which the product must lie. We see, then, that we cannot in this case depend upon the first place of decimals, as (151) an error of ·05 cannot exist if this place be correct; and here is a possible error of ·09 and upwards. It is hardly necessary to say, that if the numbers given be exact, their product is exact also, and that this article applies where the numbers given are correct only to a certain number of decimal places. The rule is: Take half the sum of the multiplier and multiplicand, remove the decimal point as many places to the left as there are correct places of decimals in either the multiplier or multiplicand; the result is the quantity within which the product can be depended upon. In division, the rule is: Proceed as in the last rule, putting the dividend and divisor in place of the multiplier and multiplicand, and divide by the square of the divisor; the quotient will be the quantity within which the division of the first dividend and divisor may be depended upon. Thus, if 17·324 be divided by 53·809, both being correct to the third place, their half sum will be 35·566, which, by the last rule, is made ·035566, and is to be divided by the square of 53·809, or, which will do as well for our purpose, the square of 50, or 2500. The result is something less than ·00002, so that the quotient of 17·324 and 53·809 can be depended on to four places of decimals.

153. It is required to multiply two decimal fractions together, so as to retain in the product only a given number of decimal places, and dispense with the trouble of finding the rest. First, it is evident that we may write the figures of any multiplier in a contrary order (for example, 4321 instead of 1234), provided that in the operation we move each line one place to the right instead of to the left, as in the following example:

22212221
12344321
88842221
6663  4442
4442    6663
2221      8884
27407142740714