> I understand, but what I was saying is that it doesn't really make all
> that much a difference. There are just too many cases where you would
> still be using fractions and decimals, so a different base doesn't
> simplify things in the long run.
> Base 12 might be helpful when doing math in your head and it might be
> more intuitive in the most simple situations, but surely there would
> have to be some other overiding reason to use another base (other than
> the arbitrary numbers of digits, knuckles, and limbs), such as in the
> CS uses of Binary, Octal, And Hexadecimal.
>
> > Having ten fingers is obviously a
> > key factor, but there are examples of cultures that used base
> > 20 or 60, so it's not exactly the only one. I imagine that
> > we would use base 12 if we had 6 fingers. But suppose we had
> > 3 hands with 7 fingers each. Would we really use base 21?
> >
>
> Well....I agree.....but the point I was making implies that it doesn't
> really matter which base one uses in the long run. A value is a value
> no matter how it is expressed. And that's really what is being
> discussed isn't it? How values are expressed and if there are better
> ways to do this? (I'm thinking that calculation is a straightforward
> mechanical process in any base.)
>
> Am I wrong in thinking this?
>
> xponent
No, you're right. To first order, any base would work.
But there are some subtle reasons for prefering some bases over
others. Take -pi as a base, for instance. Then pi^2 - 3*pi
+ 2*1 - 2*pi^(-1) + 2*pi^(-2) = 2.0108..., so we have that two
is 132.22... in base -pi. If you pick the wrong base, all the
numbers you care about will be infinite decimals. : )
---David
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
