Is it difficult to include precision when reporting measurements? No
Is it sometimes valuable? Yes
Is it really too much to ask for? No
Is it difficult to include precision when reporting measurements? No
Is it sometimes valuable? Yes
Is it really too much to ask for? No
* Give an error bound like 45.73490534578° (±0.00002°) and indicate in prose that this is a 2σ bound.
* Put non-significant figures in parenthesis, like 45.73490(534578)° (EDIT: possibly I've misinterpreted this one when I've seen it, see logfromblammo's reply)
* Put a bar over the last significant figure, like 45.73490̄534578 (hopefully this one renders properly when I post this... (EDIT: nope))
45.73490534578(2000000)
If I say the atomic weight of F is 18.998403163(6) g/mol...
mean 18.998403163 g/mol
std.dev. 0.000000006 g/mol
If I say Planck time is 5.391245(60)e−44 s... mean 5.391245e−44 s
std.dev. 0.000060e-44 s
The standard rules for rounding imply that whenever a measurement is given to a certain number of significant figures, you're leaving out "0(5)" from the end. So 1.2345 is 1.23450(5) in parenthetical notation.Significant figures rules give you a close-enough propagation of error, but in order to be more exact, you need to combine absolute uncertainties when adding or subtracting, and combine relative uncertainties when multiplying or dividing.
I.e. if you measure carbon from the upper atmosphere, it's going to have more C-14 in it, from cosmic rays flipping protons in N-14 to neutrons. And if you measure carbon buried for thousands of years, it's going to have less C-14, from natural decay.
If you look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_physical_constants you can see that the parentheses are omitted from defined constants, and included for measured constants.
An intuitive way to understand this is considering how much work is necessary to extract information from the next digit. You can use statistic to extract more information. As a rule of thumb you need 100 times more measurements for each additional digit. So you need something like 100 (or 400) for the first digit, 10000 (or 40000) for the second digit and so on. (There is a constant here, I never remember the constant, perhaps it's 4, perhaps it's 1.)
To extract some information from the last 8 in 45.73490534578° you need 1000000000000 measurements! So it's better to just ignore the tiny amount of information in the 8.
In the lab in very controlled scenarios you can repeat a measurement very carefully a lot of times automatically and then use statistics. But if you have a handheld GPS, you can't repeat the measurement more than a few hundred of times.
A device that use a somewhat similar process is the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lock-in_amplifier it is not exactly this statistic trick, but note that it needs an stable environment to repeat the measurements. Wikipedia says that it can detect a signal 1 million times smaller than noise, but IIRC (the cheap ones?) can only detect a signal that is 1/100 or 1/1000 of the noise..
PS: Please never use 45.73490534578° (±0.00002°). If you use in a lab in the university, the TA will get mad at you. You can try using 45.73490534578° (±0.00002000000°) that is bad but not so horrible bad, the TA will still get mad at you but you may survive.