David Hobby wrote: > >>> However, a base 12 counting system would have been much better; >> >> No, it wouldn't > > Well, a little better. > A little worse.
> Depending how you count, you can > argue that 12 "has more factors" than 10. This must be worth > something, since I don't hear anyone pushing for prime bases such > as 11. Agreed, it's not a big deal. It might be more to make a > number base feel "comfortable" than a great aid in calculations. > The problem with base 12 is that it has _2_ twice and _3_ once when you factor it, so that the "practical man" rules to check if a number is divisible by another would get a higher degree of confusion. Base 6 would be a much better choice than base 12. I don't see many advantages in base 6 over base 10: the only one that comes to my mind is that base 10 has simple rules to check if a number is divisible by 2, 5, 3, 9 and 11; with base 6, there would be simple rules for 2, 3, 5 and 7; maybe losing 11 and gaining 7 could count as a minor improvement. OTOH, base 12 would have simple rules for 2, 3, 4, 6, 11 and 13, and since the base-10 rules for 4 and 6 are one bit less simple than the rules for 4 and 6 in base-12, we would _lose_ the rules for 5 and gain the rules for 13 - which is a bad trade. Alberto Monteiro who spends his time in the traffic looking at the numbers of the cars and dividing them by 11. _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
