>>7622797>We actually have 1.820986998×10^(24)Bullshit.
Your post is wildly typical of somebody still in school: You see 3.0 and think that means "3.000000000000000000 arbitrarily rounded to 3.0" and it does NOT. It means "I have an amount of hydrogen and I do not know how much, but my measuring device tells me that it is 3.0, which is the result it would return for all masses of hydrogen between 2.95 and 3.05.
So you have an amount of hydrogen X where X >= 2.95 and X < 3.05 gram, which means you have a number of hydrogen atoms Y where Y >= 1.76e24 and Y < 1.82e24.
If you want a single number, you represent by writing 1.8e24 atoms.
Additionally: You do the sig fig rounding AT THE END. You don't have 3.0 mol H, you have 3.024 mol H, which you then multiply by A to get 1.821e24 which you THEN round to two sig figs 1.8e24.
Claiming that you "actually" have
>1.820986998×10^(24)atoms means you claim to know the mass of hydrogen out to 10 sig figs, which is a neat trick with a weight calibrated to 2 sig figs.
Additionally:
>an error of 1.15%Oh no! An error of 1% on a device claiming only 1% accuracy! What horror!
