# Writing number correct to 2 decimal places



## Becca (12 Dec 2009)

A question states, "*write 12.826 correct to 2 decimal places*."

Should this be written as 12.82 or 12.83 ?

The second answer rounds up because of the number 6, though the question does not state to "*round up/down*" just to "*write correct*".  So I was just wondering...

Thanks


----------



## gipimann (12 Dec 2009)

I'd round it up.

When correcting to 2 decimal places, round up if the 3rd digit is 5 or greater and round down if the 3rd digit is less than 5.

That's what I remember from school anyway!


----------



## pjmn (12 Dec 2009)

12.83


if the third digit after the decimal point is 5, 6, 7, 8 or 9, you round the second digit up (by one), if the third digit behind the decimal point is 0,1,2,3 or 4, you leave the second digit as is.


pjmn


----------



## Becca (12 Dec 2009)

Thanks very much guys.


----------



## mathepac (12 Dec 2009)

12.82 - you are not asked to round up or down in the question but to write the number *"correct to 2 decimal places" * which is 12.82.


----------



## allthedoyles (12 Dec 2009)

the correct number to 2 decimal places is 12.83


----------



## BillK (12 Dec 2009)

12.83


----------



## Towger (12 Dec 2009)

Then you also have Bankers Rounding... More info here


----------



## mathepac (12 Dec 2009)

Towger said:


> Then you also have Bankers Rounding... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rounding


All rounding is irrelevant - 12.826 correct to 2 decimal places is 12.82.


----------



## dontaskme (12 Dec 2009)

mathepac said:


> All rounding is irrelevant - 12.826 correct to 2 decimal places is 12.82.


 
no, 12.83 is right.


----------



## mathepac (12 Dec 2009)

12.83 is 12.826 rounded to 2 decimal places.


----------



## Hoagy (12 Dec 2009)

Any help?


----------



## burmo (12 Dec 2009)

12.83


----------



## Caveat (12 Dec 2009)

I agree with mathepac's point, but I think it's probably more likely that the intention of the question was to round the number, so in that case, 12.83.

Depends on the source of the question I suppose as to whether or not it is likely to be a 'trick question' which arguably it would be, if answered literally as in mathepac's response/interpretation.


----------



## panathon (12 Dec 2009)

'correct to' implies round the number. The answer is 12.83


----------



## DrMoriarty (12 Dec 2009)

+1


becca said:


> a question states, "*write 12.826 correct to 2 decimal places*."


----------



## Ann1 (12 Dec 2009)

12.83 
I can still hear Sister Brigid saying 'please round your answer to the highest decimal point'.


----------



## z107 (12 Dec 2009)

128.26*10^-1


----------



## sustanon (12 Dec 2009)

umop3p!sdn said:


> 128.26*10^-1


 
hahaha, very good!


----------



## SparkRite (13 Dec 2009)

umop3p!sdn said:


> 128.26*10^-1


 
Yes very good

And I suppose, technically correct.


----------



## GarBow (13 Dec 2009)

mathepac said:


> 12.82 - you are not asked to round up or down in the question but to write the number *"correct to 2 decimal places" *which is 12.82.


----------



## z107 (13 Dec 2009)

12.82 < 12.826 so 12.82 is not correct
 12.83 > 12.826 so this isn't correct either

(See my previous post for the correct, unrounded, answer)


----------



## UFC (13 Dec 2009)

I agree with mathepac, the answer is 12.82, however I agree with the other posters that the person who wrote the question problem meant to say rounded to two decimal places.

I have a maths degree.


----------



## dewdrop (13 Dec 2009)

I have no maths degree and am somewhat amused that the experts find it difficult to agree


----------



## SparkRite (13 Dec 2009)

dewdrop said:


> I have no maths degree and am somewhat amused that the experts find it difficult to agree


 
I don't think there is any disagreement on that 12.826 ROUNDED to 2 decimal places is 12.83.

The disagreement is with what the original question actually asks.
ie. to round or NOT to round to 2 decimal places.

What are we like????


----------

