Re: FW: Metric etc

[bearbvd@domain.elided (Greg Hermann)]

><<In my mind the only justification for using a base ten system of numbers
>is
>that is how many fingers and toes most of us have! There are decent
>arguments for base eight and sixteen numbering systems, on account of the
>(relatively) new digital world, but the most rational system on a numerical
>basis would be base twelve, no question. Simply consider how many more
>integral divisors twelve has than ten, eight, or sixteen! It would be easy
>enough to figure out something else to use the stray four digits for in a
>hexadecimal oriented computer.
>Greg>>
>
>Huhhh?

Twelve is evenly divisible by 2, 3, 4, and 6. Ten is evenly divisible only
by 2 and 5. This has many potential advantages in both commerce and design!

Count 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9,  @, &,10, 11,12,13,14, 15, 16, 17,18,
19, 1@, 1&, 20, 21, etc. (base twelve)
- --------- 0. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11,12, 13,14,15,16, 17, 18,
19,20, 21, 22 , 23 , 24 , 25, etc (base ten)

Substituting any symbol you care to establish for @ and &.

A base twelve system of numbers is simply FAR more rational, numerically
than a base ten system. It would just be a little harder for children to
learn to count on their fingers in base twelve.

Greg

------------------------------