You don't have to have a different number base to make math interesting, just create a variable. Or use logarithms.

__________________
Onus probandi incumbit ei qui dicit, non ei qui negat

I recondition w123/w126/w124/w140/r107/r129/ steering boxes!


1984 300D "Elsa" odo reset 6/2011 147k
1983 300TD "Mitzi" ~268k OM603 powered
1995 E300 "Adelheid" 262k [Sold]

The Roman counting system is really base 5. But their engineers and scientists used sexagesimal, a cultural appropriation from the Greeks. I think that even in Roman times, Roman numerals were used primarily for ceremonial arches and book indexing. If you'd like to explore the subject of historical counting systems, hunt up the work of Georges Ifrah. His Universal History of Numbers is available in English translation.

I'd use this quote in response to folks who think we made a big advance by going to metric measures or decimal pricing in the stock markets. There's no absolute right or wrong in counting and measurement systems. But when you ask why things are a certain way, you may realize there may be implications to a measurement system based on the average length of human body parts, rather than a great circle of the earth. Or a counting system based on the most efficient form of finger counting. Or pricing a stock based on meeting in the middle. When you think you're making an advance, it's good to think about what you're losing. When progress has too high a cost, it loses integrity.

The Mayans had advanced skills in science an engineering, using vigesimal arithmetic. Their long count was the most accurate calendar prior to the modern era. By contrast, Vitruvius would still be doing the long division if he had used roman numerals to engineer the aqueducts. So these things may matter more than you think, and they are certainly interesting.

Two systems at work:

Why do computer programmers confuse Halloween with Christmas?

__________________
"I applaud your elaborate system of denial"

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vigesimal

Base twenty looks useful for barefoot counting.

The auto industry has pretty much gone metric. Buildings and anything to do with them are still SAE, a.k.a "English" units.

Our next house will have kitchen countertops that are 39.37" above the floor. I'm tall and working at a 36" high countertop hurts my neck. The 39.37" high countertop makes all the difference in the world. (I guess I could settle for 39.0".)

Because, Oct 31 = Dec 25

(octal 31 = decimal 25)

__________________
"I applaud your elaborate system of denial"

It used to be 12, but since the whole sale now uses 100 instead of 144 the supermarkets sell them in packages of 6-10-20-30

The metric in system was introduced in Europe by Napoleon.
He wanted a uniform system for all countries he liberated (or occupied depending or your viewpoint).

The standard meter was of course kept is the centre of the word (Paris).

It had to be a system that was very easie to adapt to.
10cm square is 1 litre, 1 litre of water weights 1kg. Water freezes at 0 degree Celsius and boils at 100 . Most people can do the math.

Napoleon. So metric is a political, as opposed to a rational, decision. Uniformity in measurement can be achieved with any number base. In base 12, 12 is 10. And 144 is 100. The number 1728 is 1000. The same order of magnitude relationships among meter, centimeter, millimeter would still hold And there would be 10 milli's in a centi and so on, (except 10 would have twelve divisions). If everything was duodecimalized, this wouldn't cause a brain fart.

The things you think of as intuitive and obvious are sometimes learned prejudices. And there's a cost to that. Your ability to relate large numbers to the physical arrangement of your body parts is enhanced with duodecimal. The architecture of your hands makes it possible to use your fingers as a rapid calculator in base 12, but it's harder to do that in base 10. (Even harder in base 5, just ask the Romans.) It's actually base 10 that would be inexplicable you if you were raised duodecimal. The question here is, what are we going to teach the children?

As far as I can tell , they're not seriously teaching them anything right now .

My daughter in law is working hard to keep my grand kids ahead of the now abandoned curve .

__________________
-Nate
1982 240D 408,XXX miles
Ignorance is the mother of suspicion and fear is the father

I did then what I knew how to do ~ now that I know better I do better

My middle finger is 10cm.

At school we used sliding rule calculators and logarithmic tables.
You needed a basic understanding of what you were doing.

The introduction of the metric system was more for practical than political reasons.
Before the metric system, feet and other body parts were used all over Europe, the problem was that feet are not of equal size. In trading this leaded to (deliberate) confusion. In construction standardisation is essential.

The metric system was understandable and acceptable for (nearly) everyone
Choosing a system that was already used in some place would lead to discussion (we are not using French feet!!!).

He provided all schools with teaching materials for the metric system.
Of course it helped that he also constructed an extensive road system (Routes Napoleon, lined with trees for shade), equal rights for everyone and a constitution (Code Napoleon).

I ran into that feet variability when looking at old French Louisiana conveyance records. Using the date the maps were made I tracked down the length of a royal (Louisiana) foot to an American survey foot. At that time the French colonies had several definitions of the length of a foot. Luckily I was using a map drawn by a well-regarded French engineer in 1724. Over the course of 1320 American feet shifted the distance by 10 feet or so vs the royal foot, iirc. I could look it up But the point is that it makes a big difference.

If that confusion existed all over Europe, Napoleon had to change things to run an empire. Having been an artillery officer, he probably had a better math background than most kings at the time.