It’s not wrong, it’s close enough. And the point it works with more numbers and more type of calculation. Let’s calculate 4% of 1243. That’s the same as 1243% of 4, right, much easier to calculate by simply changing the 2 numbers… While my method is the same, by simply rounding everything.
And in engineering you always multiply/divide your results by a 1.5 or 1.25 safety factor, depending on situation. So you don’t have to calculate exact results, just close enough. E.g. G is always 10m/s2. π is only 3.14, the other digits doesn’t matter.
I’m confused by this statement, the answer is 3. Why do all these extra steps for a wrong answer?
It’s not wrong, it’s close enough. And the point it works with more numbers and more type of calculation. Let’s calculate 4% of 1243. That’s the same as 1243% of 4, right, much easier to calculate by simply changing the 2 numbers… While my method is the same, by simply rounding everything.
And in engineering you always multiply/divide your results by a 1.5 or 1.25 safety factor, depending on situation. So you don’t have to calculate exact results, just close enough. E.g. G is always 10m/s2. π is only 3.14, the other digits doesn’t matter.
That’s the stupidest shit I have heard today. You should feel ashamed if you really are an engineer
That’s how engineering is. In civil you can round π=5 for a lot of calculations. In astrophysics I’ve seen e=π=10