How is 0.754 x 0.8 interpreted in addition?
929129
Hi. 0.754 x 1.0 would be obvious.  0.754 x .1 would involve moving the decimal point one place to the left.  0.754 x 0.8 would involve solving for the last value and adding 8 times.
809077
I would assume that one of your .01s in column A is something like 0.012.\n\nChange your number  format to General and see what happens.
779807
Yiu would first decide how many decimal places you are going to consider.  The usual is 3.  Then work it from there...;
949695
The correct answer is:\n\n2,432,902,008,176,640,000\n\nYour calculator probably rounded it all little saying your answer is 2.43 with 18 digits after the decimal place.  Genally you'll take the 18 digits as 0 unless some of it is specified originally.\n\nScientific notation is shown two ways:\n2.43 x 10^18\nOR\n2.43E18\n\nFor example\n500 can be stated as 5 x 10^2  OR  5E2\n44200 can be stated as 4.42 x 10^4  OR  4.42E4
500392
5.46*0.3=1.638   1.638-9.86= -8.222  so your answer is -8.222
908586
GB >= 0.6*(CS + GB)\n\n"cushion" variable U introduced : \n\nU >= 0 \nGB + U = 0.6 * (CS + GB)
874920
You do cube it and get  0.000001 but that's cm cubed so it's more than you might think!
440057
75.348837209302325581395348837209 %\n\nor 75.35 % rounded off!\n\nOr 75 to make it simpler!
665207
12.8 & -0.15\n\nEach multiplied by (1/41) gives\n0.312195122 & -0.003658536
742231
I don't understand "readability" either, but I could point out that I would replace "to the power of " with the uppercase character on your 6 key, the "^". So 4.06 x 10^5 is the way I'd do it.
193745
1.25 * 10^-3 * 8 * 10^-5\n\n(1.25 * 8) * (10^-3 * 10^-5)\n\n(10^1) * (10^-8)\n\nANSWER : 1.0 * 10^-7
1011511
depends:  \ntry \n747.60,\n430,\n362.17,\n569.89,\n997.4,\n997.5\nor 743.58
282022
if .5 + .5 = .10 were true, then by the same logic, 5 + 5 = 1\n\nAnd that's obviously wrong.\n\n7.28 - .6 is obviously 6.68, because of place holding.\n\nwrite it like 7.28-.60, and it's easier.
837631
I've always assumed that the 2 was 2.00000000000000000....etc.\n\nSo, I would say use two sig figs.
921510
0.00056 = 0.056%, and by the way, \n0.056     = 5.6 % and\n5.6         = 560%
16547
Oddities like this are due to floating-point math, and are quite common, unfortunately.  The problem is that floating point numbers are stored in binary, and so they can only be an approximation of most numbers (like .1).  I bet if you do this calculation in Python or C, you'll get the same sort of answer.
233014
U R RIGHTT..HOW DID YA GET IT..PLZ CAN YA EXPLAIN..I'VE BEEN TRYING THIS PROBLEM FROM A LONGTIME.EVEN DE CALCULATOR SAYS ITZ "4"..I KNOW DE CALCULATORS WRONG TOO..PLZZ DO EXPLAIN IT TO ME ASAP