/sci/ - Science & Math

>>5608704

I would choose base 16

>>5608704
The trippiest part about that gif is the realization that the actual structure of the drawing doesn't need to change in any way, only our perspective of it...

>>5608713
mah nigga

>>5608704

Base 69

>>5608739

I don't understand your question.

babylonians were the first to use a 'base' as opposed to tally.
i think they used base 60.
why not go back to that?

egyptians had base 12, they counted joints instead of fingers (hence the 12 hour clock)

>>5608747
I don't understand that comic... Is the joke just that the alien can't count?

>>5608761
they translate "base 10" as "default base"

>>5608761
>Not understanding how number bases work

>>5608765
Oh, because 4 in base 4 is base 10 to them, I get it now.

>>5608766
>being a presumptuous faggot

>>5608765
>>5608774
It's still wrong though, because if they have a concept of bases they will know what other bases there are and will understand the difference between base 10 and base 4.

So, kind of a stupid comic.

>>5608783
but our base 10 would be their base 22

What base did Jesus use?

>if we would

I don't know much about english grammer but isn't that wrong?

>>5608789

Base potato.

>>5608794
Enjoy Hell, fag.

>>5608796

I will give so many demons blow jobs.

>>5608787
No it wouldn't, that might be how they describe our base IN their base, but surely they, like us, would be able to imagine other bases independent of their own.

Exempli gratia

I've never counted in base 3 before, but I understand the concept of bases which allows me to do this:
0
1
2
10
11
12
20
21
22
100
101
102
110
111
112
120

if the aliens are thus able to understand bases they will then see the difference between base 10 and 4

>>5608792

A bit non-standard.. I would say "If we were to"

>>5608796
Enjoy potato, hell

>>5608704
Base 2 is most natural. Or base e. That'd work right?

>>5608792
No, but spelling "grammer" thus, is.

>>5608805
How is base 2 more natural?

Best base in terms of efficiency of representation: 3

Best bases in terms of representing rationals: primorials.

Base 12 is not really any better than 10.

It is believed that we use base 10 because we have 10 fingers.
I know a guy that has only 9 fingers. He is always 5 or 9 minutes late.

>>5608850
>Base 12 is not really any better than 10.
It has more factors...

>>5608842
Well, from a strictly autistic point of view a very nice unary fundamental operation on a set is the power set. the power set is the set of all subsets of the set. There exist 2^n elements in the power set of a set with n elements.

>>5608726
hyperbolic plane

>>5608852
Let's use base 100! then; it has lots of factors.

>>5608942
Good luck counting using that

>Can't even properly sage
>Sages for no apparent reason

base ten is pretty good. i could see an argument for base 12. base 16 is a little high, would only increase the number of arithmetic operations one would have to memorize and 10 - 20 is when people tend to start thinking of numbers as groups instead of constituents of individuals. i think base ten works well for the average human brain.

>>5608800
except the numbers they know are 1 2 3 10 11 12 13 20 21 etc

there is no 4. the word 4 has no meaning to the alien.

>>5608985
lets drop to base 10 then (8base10)

It has the advantages of base 100 (16base10) without the worry about sutpid people not understanding.

>>5608704
base 4*3*5=60 is better for obvious reason

I think base 12 is the best - having factors of 2, 3, 4 and 6 are more useful than just 2 and 5.
While I think base 16 is pretty good, it wouldn't be as useful in day-to-day life compared to 12 (though maybe it would be better compared to base 10?)

>>5608977
>not registering your downvote with a sage

>shiggles

>>5608800
When the Alien hears base 10, that's it's version of 4, so it thinks it's saying base 4, the alien will surely know of our base 10, but would represent it as base 22 (I think)

8 has the same number of factors as 10, so why not use base 8?

>>5608704
Honestly, yes, because then our numbers could be easily split into halves, thirds, and fourths. With base ten, we can only easily do halves.

>>5609007
4 and 6 arent factors. only 2 and 3 are. only primes can be factors.

2 and 5 are best factors for fractions. They form terminating decimals. so 1/10 base3 would be would be .11111 forever. which is silly. if it terminated to .1 math is much easier.

>>5609041
and fifths

>>5609084
wait thats wrong. they only form terminating decimals in base 10. because my math education is incomplete I am stupid

>>5609091
which means base 210 or base 2310 would be better.

but it has other downsides. hurmmm.

>>5609084
4 is a factor of 12, because 12/4 = 3 (3 being an integer)
What you've described is a prime factor.

>>5609100
prime factors are the only ones that actually count

>>5609109
Explain why? Being able to split a number into quarters is incredibly useful, especially since you still get a nice whole number left

>>5609122
numbers in base 12 that do not split neatly into quarters 1 2 3 5 6 7 9 t e 11 12 13 15 16 17 19 1t 1e etc

numbers in base 10 that do not split neatly into quarters 1 2 3 5 6 7 9 10 11 13 14 15 17 18 19 etc

The only benefit to more factors deals with terminating decimals, which would only be concerned with prime factors.

>>5609093
If we're talking primorials, going higher than base 30 isn't really worth it. Human memorization would be very hard with over two hundred symbols, and operations involving 7 and 11 mostly aren't important enough to warrant that. If it's only meant for computer use, then you should rather use base 64 or another power of two.

>>5609180
if the japanese can memorize many thousands of symbols for their written language. we can memorize many hundreds of digits for our math.

It would be very silly and useless though for just about everyone. I agree with powers of 2. my personal preference would be for base 8.

>>5609142
Let me rewrite that list for you:

Numbers in base 12 that have non-terminating decimals when 12 is divided by them:
5, 7, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 17, 19, and so on

Numbers in base 10 that have non-terminating decimals when 10 is divided by them:
3, 6, 7, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18, 19, and so on

It's not just the prime factors - but all factors of that base.

>>5609193

I just want to use base sixteen so I don't have to convert back and forth between hex and decimal notation..

>>5608704
Man that Gif. is like transcending it's view of itself to a view from it's center to a view from inside its center

>>5609197
but converting from oct to hex is so quick and easy.

>>5609193

Numbers in base 12 that have non-terminating decimals when 12 is divided by them:
5, 7, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 17, 19, and so on


Numbers in base 6 that have non-terminating decimals when 6 is divided by them:
5, 7, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 17, 19, and so on

The list is the exact same, but 6 does not have 4 as a factor. Why is it exactly the same? because only prime factors matter.

>>5609207

bytes is eight bits.. which is more than two and less than three octal digits

did I mention I'm lazy?

>>5609213
Right, that would be two steps for easy conversion. still quicker than from dec though.
252
=
010 101 010
=
0 1010 1010
=
99

Or does that count as 3 steps?

>>5608989
>>5609015
Yes but you are missing the fact that it is irrelevant what we call the number, anyone with a concept of bases will understand what it represents. I.e. in hexadecimal 'D' represents 13th digit, but it could be any symbol that represents it. Obviously, without any context this would be impossible to know, but that's why this comic is so terrible. It relies on too many assumptions.

>>5609259
the other direction yes. there were 22base4 objects, and the alien said there are 10 objects, and I said oh you must use base 22 I use base 10(pronounced 4). The alien would know what a 4 is, because his base uses 4. there is a word for it.

>>5609251

Two steps.

Two too many.

Hexadecimal is the best decimal.

Decimal is best

Only stupid Americans argue about this shit because their system isn't SI

>>5609279
I will only agree if we can make new symbols that aren't also letters.

>>5609287
oh shit, i hadn't considered what that would do. is it too late to change SI as well?

>>5608704
Someone make a base 12 arithmetic and algebra textbook

>>5609318
>writing a capital 'A' backwards
full retard

>>5609291

It's never too late!

how many grains in a dram?

>>5609289

I usually write them upside down or backwards

>>5609320
10base12

Hi guys. What about base { ?

Every power of 2 is best base.
Prime numbers are worst bases.

>>5609368
2 is a prime number.

>>5609393

RAGE FACE.

>>5608787

serious question:

wouldn't this be also correct if one said
"but our base 10 would be their base X"
where x is any integer bigger than 10.

Seriously, Base 21 and Base 22 only differ in one "letter". I don't really see why it would have to be base 22.

>>5609419
because
01=1
02=2
03=3
10=4
11=5
12=6
13=7
20=8
21=9
22=10

>>5609419

because 10 base 10 is 22 base 4

>>5608942
>>5608977
More importantly, good luck finding enough symbols.

>>5608942
it only has 2 prime factors 2 and 5 the same as base 10

base 30 would have 3. base 210 has 4

>>5609423
>>5609425

aha, i get it now. thanks.

>>5609441
No, it has every prime from 1 to 100 as a factor.

>>5609423

what if you start counting with zero?
is it then base 23? or are you "not allowed" to start counting with zero.

>>5609451
primes it is divisible by 2, 5
primes it is not divisible by 3,7,11,13,17,19,23,29,31,37,41,43,47,53,59,61,67,71,73,79,83,89,97

>>5609471
i mean base 21.

eg.
0 = 1
1 = 2
2 = 3
3 = 4
10 = 5
11 = 6
12 = 7
13 = 8
20 = 9
21 = 10

why is this not correct?

>>5609473
You do realize what 100! means, right?
100! = 1 * 2 * 3 * 4 * 5 * 6 * 7 * 8 * 9 * 10 .... * 99 * 100
= 1 * 2 * 3... * 5... * 7... * 11... * 13... *17... * 19... * 23... *29... * 31... *33... *37... *41... * 43... * 47... *53... *59... * 61... * 67... * 71... * 73... * 79... * 83... * 87... * 89... * 91... * 97... * 100

>>5609471
the units of a base are base^x
so base 10 the units are 1 (10^0) 10 (10^1) 100 (10^2)etc
or going into decimals .1 (10^-1) .01 (10^-2)

for 4 it would be 1 (4^0) 4 (4^1) 16(4^2)

>>5609482
I missed the !

I thought you were just really excited.

You are correct.

>>5609482
wrong <span class="math">100!=∫_{0}^{∞} t^{100}e^{-t}dt[/spoiler]

>>5608852
It has two factors, 2 and 3, and 10 has 2 and 5. It has more divisors than 10 but I don't find this particularly compelling.

>>5612157
I can agree even thirds can be a bit more useful than even fifths. But overall base 30 would be better as it gives us both.

hexadecimal

>>5610652
>implying that gives a different result

thursday friday happy days

the weekend comes,

the cycle hums

cruising all week with yoouuuu

If the base should be a prime

I would go with 5.