Is a electronic scale accurate?
594502
I don't think so...because when I used it, it said that I was like 10 pounds more then what my regular house scale was!
465681
Try Google Earth.  It appears to be fairly accurate if you are in the U.S.  I have used it in my job, comparing it to a different data source, and have had good results.  Plus, it's just kinda fun!
981977
look to see how many decimal points the scale gives you.  that's the accuracy of the scale.\n\nif your scale gives you 0.10 it measures to within 0.01\n\nif your scale gives yoiu 0.100 it measures to within 0.001 accurancy.
729655
easiest way to tell, is if it ticks.\nRolex's just go round smoothly.
521632
Yes the scale will reflect the additional weight.\n\nThe downward force on the water is still an additional downward force which is measured by the scale.
387959
They are pretty accurate. They can be fooled, but you have to have a lot of self control and know what you are doing to trick it. Most of the time the best people can do is just give inconclusive results, not pass off a lie as truth or vice versa.
674000
mechanical or electronic?
858321
yes, it is true. depending on how much u eat, that is. if u eat a small amount of food, then there wont be a huge difference on the scale. if you eat allot of food, there would be more of a difference on the scale
1137602
It all depends to the refernce in which its talk about... it could be measurement of something.. like paper for example (but with specific units)\nit could be.. dots per inch (dpi) but not very usual figures for dpi....\nor could be just what others say.... 6210
887317
Yes, that's right.  The units should be consistent.
1084329
It depends on the cause of the inaccuracy.  There are 3 different types of errors that could create inaccuracy:  1) precision error - this is usually half of the divisions of the measuring device. For example, a stopwatch that measures to the nearest second has a precision error of +/- 0.5 seconds. A stopwatch that measures to the nearest tenth of a second has a precision error of +/- 0.05 seconds.  The precision error for the particular device will always be the same, no matter if you measure 1 second, 1 minute, 1 hour, 5 hours, or 24 hours.  2) random errors - these errors will be different each time you make a measurement. Human measuring inaccuracy usually is random. For example, the inaccuracy of starting the stopwatch and stopping the stopwatch when timing a race would be a random error. Again, these random errors will probably be about the same regardless of whether you are timing a 1 minute event, a 1 hour event, a 5 hour event, or a 24 hour event. 3) systematic errors - these are errors caused by the device or the measurement procedure, and are not random.  These errors may be either proportional to the quantity being measured, or they may be constant.  Example: an old analog spring bathroom scale that is not "zeroed" may be exactly 2 pounds off (in which case the error will not change regardless of how much weight is being measured) or the scale's spring may be calibrated wrong, in which case the error will be proportional to the weight placed on it.\n\nWithout knowing the type of error that contributes to the +/- 2.33 second inaccuracy over 24 hours, one really cannot say if the stopwatch would also be inaccurate by +/- 2.33 seconds when measuring 5 hours (for example, if it were a random error) or if the stopwatch would be inaccurate by 5/24 of +/- 2.33 seconds (for example, a systematic error that increased with the measured quantity).
1141850
Online ones, no.  But if you are given the WISC or the Woodcock-Johnson IQ tests then they are fairly accurate.  You want to get a verbal score and a performance score and then the full scale IQ score.\nNow if English is not the first language, the test results may be skewed as well.
451792
We don't yet have any reliable measurement. One widely held assumption is that it is the same as \n.. Doh! .. I can't say that.
739157
Direct measurement will be correct.\nPeople can be mistaken, or lie.\n\n;-D Where did you not learn to spell? Wow.
971238
systematic error: error constantly biased by a fixed amount\n\nexample.  if your scale was improperly calibrated, and was always off by 2 pounds.  so if you're 150 lbs the scale says 152 lbs, if you're 300 lbs, the scale says 302\n\nrandom error: unpredictable chaotic error that appears in repeated measurement and it can not be removed through calibration\n\nexample: your scale is kinda messed up, and you weigh yourself ten times and the reading is different each time
947289
I would guess that the double pan would be the most accurate because you have actual weights on one side counter what you are weighing on the other side.
467338
Go  to this site: http://sheldonbrown.com/cyclecom_calibration_proc.html  Sheldon has both calibration procedures and calibration settings. The calibration charts are at http://sheldonbrown.com/cyclecomputer-calibration.html  The computer can be very accurate if you put in the proper calibration number.