Galantini stated a fact from manual: «4- The thermometers have a margin of error of +/- 0,05 Celsius»
Lomax replied with speculation: «This depends on the probe. However, from other data (such as probe rated temperature of 150 C.) the probe has an accuracy of +/- 0.4 C. He's greatly overstated the accuracy, it seems, and that is crucial here. The *resolution* is 0.1 C., and I think he munges that into +/- 0.05.» You still do not get it that thermometer must be calibrated in respect of boiling or freezing point of water before it can be used for accurate measurements. Without calibration, it's accuracy is just ±0.4°C. But thermometer reproducibility is ±0.05°C and this means that thermometer gives same reading with this accuracy in two consequetive measurements. As Mats Lewan calibrated the thermometer that boiling point was 99.6°C, altough real boiling point in Bologna in that particular day was 99.9°C. This is what it meas that thermometer accuracy is ±0.4. But relative accuracy or precision or reproducibility is always higher in thermometer than the resolution of display. In this case digits are by one decimal, hence ±0.05°C accuracy. I have said this before, but it seems that you are not familiar with this calibration issue. But, no other negative comments on your Galantini critique. It was quite accurate with precision ±0.05. —Jouni
