-> 12 is a multiple of 2, 3, 4 and 6. There have been 4 bit, 6 bit, 8
-> bit, etc. computers. 16 ounces per pound. I don't know. Ancient
-> mathematicians struggled with it. There must be a good reason we
-> inherited a system based on a "dozen."
-> But I do know that those of us who are comfortable with it, in
-> context, are not all stupid. (However, many are.)
4 doesn't really count, since it's not a prime.
Binary is simple for computers. 4-bit, 8-bit, etc., machines just
extend the power-of-2 idea. But using binary (or octal, hexadecomal,
etc.) for everyday calculations would be extremely clumsy, since so
many fractions would become repeating.
How comfortable are you in base-12? Here's the seven-times table:
1 x 7 = 7
2 x 7 = 12
3 x 7 = 19
4 x 7 = 24
5 x 7 = 2&
6 x 7 = 36
7 x 7 = 41
8 x 7 = 48
9 x 7 = 53
@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
x 7 = 5@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
& x 7 = 75
I've used @[EMAIL PROTECTED]
and & as the "dix" and "onze" digits. When I learned this
stuff as a kid I invented a couple of squiggles. I knew the tables all
the way up to & x & = @[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I also had names for the numbers, for example
45 was "fourzen-five". "Zen" was short for "dozen". I used the French
words for "ten" and "eleven" since they're short.
If the world adopted base-12 for everyday calculations, then I would
agree that using a system of weights and measures based on factors of
12 would be sensible. But using one base for numbers and another for
measures just makes for confusion.
dow
|
