h a l f b a k e r y
Nice swing,
no follow-through.

meta:

account: browse anonymously, or get an account and write.

 user: pass:
register,

# New maths

new maths system by wakeweirdo
 (0) [vote for, against]

i think we should introduce a new system where we count to 8 not 10 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,10

11,12,13,14,15,16,17,20

21,22,23,24,25,26,27,30

.....etc

that way you will hit round numbers at the right points.

currently if you double one and double it again and again you dont hit 10 or even 100

but this way numbers that we are using now like 12,64,128 etc would become round numbers what we now count as 8units you be 10, 64 units would be 100 etc

i know it would NEVER happen due to the ecconomics of changing but i would like to know if there is a logical / mathmatical reason why it is not better

 — wakeweirdo, Feb 29 2004

New Math http://www.sing365....1BE48256A7D002575E1
It's so simple / So very simple / that only a child can do it [friendlyfire, Oct 04 2004, last modified Oct 21 2004]

Use base 26 http://www.halfbake...dea/Alphabet_20base
[Monkfish, Oct 04 2004]

Use base 60 http://www.halfbake...-60_20Alphanumerics
There was a 'use base 12' idea around once, too, but it seems to be gone. [Monkfish, Oct 04 2004]

Some more base 60 http://www.rocknrol...k/science/roma.html

If you're not logged in, you can see what this page looks like, but you will not be able to add anything.

Annotation:

Base 12 is obviously the way to go. 2,3,4 and 6 as divisors. so nice.
 — johnmeacham, Mar 01 2004

 Fully baked as octal. It's not so hard, once you get used to it. Just try counting in hex:

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 A B C D E F 10
 — Freefall, Mar 01 2004

 There is actually a very good reason to prefer a base with a lot of divisors over others. math involving multiples of divisors is easy.

 so in base 10, math involving multiples of 5 or 10 (or fifths or tenths) is easy.

with base 12, math involving multiples of 2,3,4,6, and 12 or halves, thirds, fourths... (and so forth) becomes easy to do.
 — johnmeacham, Mar 01 2004

I think we should switch to oa base pi system, just for something to do.
 — oxen crossing, Mar 01 2004

 I was using a base derived from quaternions for a while. I even managed to count it on my fingers. Then they let me out of the sanitarium.

I think.
 — Detly, Mar 02 2004

Use Base 23! Fnord
 — Saruman, Mar 02 2004

 Anyway, Octal is baked, personally I think that base 24... or even better, a base equal to a whole factorial would solve many problems with recurrence and the like...

This idea is almost a consumer advice idea by the way?
 — Ossalisc, Mar 25 2004

We should adopt base 33, using the numbers and western alphabet (without the letters 0 and L and I to avoid confusion with zero and one) as the digits. Just think: hordes of schoolchildren can spell out taboo words while doing their math homework.
If base 33 is too difficult, we could try base 1. It would be about as useful as a map that is "actual size," scale 1 cm=1 cm.
Just 2 (or 00) ideas to consider.
 — RooneDitoff, Mar 25 2004

back: main index