[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 88 KB, 500x701, 4lz0xg.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12330309 No.12330309 [Reply] [Original]

Well /sci/, which is it?
>base 10
>base 12
>base 60
>base 120
>base 360

10 is for jews, 12 is good but dividing by 5 sucks, 60 has it all, 120 is good when dividing by 8 but is a bit large, 360 good for 9 but also very large.

Thoughts?

>> No.12330330
File: 28 KB, 351x356, blosovo_121206081_202546807925062_1633087295993101829_n.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12330330

>>12330309
>base 60+
too many different digits, unless we tae a hangul approach.

>> No.12330410

>>12330309
Progressively increasing prime bases. This wild eliminate irrational numbers caused by based (like 3 divided by 10 in base 10).

e.g.
numeral system with bases 1,2,3,5,7,11, ...

You could do your doctorate in maths just analyzing this novel base system.

>> No.12330411

>>12330309
>base 360
Xbox 360 becomes Xbox10
Xbox One becomes Xbox01
I’m thinking based

>> No.12330442

>>12330309
Hexadecimal you pleb

Allows for easy reading and writing of large binary numbers

>> No.12330448

5040

>> No.12330460

>>12330330
Roman numerals make digits obsolete
>>12330442
Humans aren't computers
>>12330448
Way too large

>> No.12330476

>>12330410
3/10 in base 10 isn't irrational but i see what you mean. base 2 would eliminate having all those shitty digits but no one wants that

>> No.12330480

>>12330309
base 2 is perfect

>> No.12330486

>>12330460
>Way too large
for you

>> No.12330506

>>12330309
Base 1

>> No.12330585

>>12330476
>>12330480
Cs fags
>>12330506
Meme

>> No.12330750

>>12330309
>not using base 7 like both jesus christ and confucius intended

>> No.12330761

>>12330309
But all of those number systems are based. Can we have something that is not based?

>> No.12330769

Base 10 is fine
Needs of billions of normies that count on their fingers > needs of mathfags butthurt about having to write fractions

>> No.12330771
File: 78 KB, 974x768, base10-living-hologram.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12330771

>>12330309
>Base 10
>Base 26
>Base 50

>>12330410
base prime, incredibly redpilled

Also I would suggest Base Fib

>> No.12330773
File: 119 KB, 501x1200, 1586119088661.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12330773

>>12330769
>go to website

>> No.12330775

>>12330769
exactly

>> No.12330791

>>12330769
Chinks count their finger sections to 12
Not everyone counts to 10

>> No.12330802

>>12330309
base [math]e[/math]

>> No.12330804

>>12330791
>"Hey, Chan, how many did you need?"
>Holds up 7 finger sections
>"Uh, right... Okay..."

>> No.12331334

Base 28

>> No.12331519

>>12330309
base grahams number lol
or unironically base three
0
1
2
10
11
12
100
101
102
110
111
112
120
121
122
200
etc

>> No.12331523

what if instead of being additive, math was based on exponentiation
and everything is base two
so like we have 0, 1, 10 where "10" is what we know as 2, then we have 11 which is what we know as 3, but then we have 100 which is what we know as 2^2 (4) so that's still the same so far.. but wait for it.. once we get to 1000 it's actually 2^2^2 so it's 8, and 10000 is 2^2^2^2 so 16

>> No.12331568

>60 has it all
Division by any prime greater than or equal to 7 still sucks, and there are a lot more single-digit primes in that system than there are in bases 10, 12 or 16.

>> No.12331573

Hey guys what about base infinity? Any number is expressable as a single digit.

>> No.12331607

>>12331573
What about base zero? You write numbers by drawing lots of nothing, so everything is already written!

>> No.12331615

>>12331573
no oyu need base infinity plus 1 because otherwise infinity is written 10 which is two digit but if its base infinity+1 then you can write infinity just as ∞ :)

>> No.12331625

>>12331615
Holy shit, you're on to something there.

>> No.12331690

>>12330309
I have done base 10 all my life. I'd lie, if I said, I hated it.
Still, it's easy to see that base 12 would be better.
Anything beyond that is just madness, though.
5 only got its highlighted position by being 10/2.
6 would become the new 5 in no time, should some madmen decide to fuck human kind up.

I don't see anything wrong with how things are.
The most important base is base 2 anyway.

>> No.12331700

>>12331690
Base 16 is convenient since it's basically just a shorthand for base 2.

>> No.12331707

>>12330309
base 1

>> No.12331718

>>12331700
true redpill and high iq

>> No.12331725

>>12331707
base d

>> No.12331757

>>12330309
12

>> No.12331776

>>12331700
>>12331718
Yeah it's clearly 16.
>Notation already exists and is completely readable (unlike bases higher than 20 where symbols abound)
>Automatic applications to compsci
>Easy conversions to all base 2^n

>> No.12331777

>>12330460
>Roman numerals make digits obsolete
>don't even have zero

>> No.12331811
File: 223 KB, 710x675, file.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12331811

>not using base [math]\infty[/math]
embarrassing

>> No.12331846

I use base 360 within base 10

Every number is a circle but circles are still discrete objects like normal base 10

>> No.12331909

>>12331811
Refer to >>12331573 and >>12331615

>> No.12331935

>>12330769
arguing for a new numeral system (along with arguing for tau instead of pi) is going to be forever a popular topic since it's the only way for a brainlet to have "radical new ideas" in math without needing more than an elementary understanding of math.

>> No.12331977
File: 39 KB, 400x300, ghottse.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12331977

>>12330309
Base 0.99999, or base [math]\hat{\infty}[/math]. By classical reasoning, either it's the best, or it isn't, and all your base are belong to us.

>> No.12331982

Irrational base or no dice.

>> No.12332030

base d

>> No.12332054
File: 463 KB, 2500x1250, tool.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12332054

>>12330309
Base i number system when bros.....

>> No.12332085

>>12330309
what is "base"?

>> No.12332187

>>12332085
It can't be explained. You have to feel it.

>> No.12332193

>>12330309
I don't think it exists, which is why we use different systems in different situations, as well as fractions.

>> No.12333071

>>12330309
base d

>> No.12333410

>>12331982
>Irrational base
That doesn't solve anything for it would turn the natural numbers into new irrational numbers, and many types of irrational number would stay irrational.

>> No.12333433
File: 12 KB, 279x380, shitposting.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12333433

Among the natural number bases, there's no mathematical ground for preferring one over the other. The choice can only be justified on practical considerations.
Which means that any proposal for a new base should come with a proposed symbology and probably something like a set of handsigns as well, in order to maximize the ease of adoption.
To illustrate, I've whipped up a proposal for a hexadecimal place-value system. The symbols are in red.

>> No.12333478

>>12330309
5 is great since you can represent i similar to how you can represent -1 in base 10 as ...99999.0

>> No.12333479

>>12330309
they all serve a use, why limit yourself to one?

>> No.12333494

>>12330309
How do numbers in other bases work?

>> No.12334547

Base 8

>> No.12334562

>>12330761
Cringe-1

>> No.12335507

>>12330411
would have been more based in denary

>> No.12336138 [DELETED] 

>>12333494
190 base 10 for example is 1 * 10^2 + 9 * 10^1 + 9 * 10^0
26 in base 2 would be 1 * 2^4 + 1 * 2^3 + 0 * 2^2 + 1 * 2^1 + 0 * 2^0 = 11010
16 in base 3 would be 1 * 3^2 + 2 * 3^1 + 1 * 3^0 = 121
I hope this helps.

>> No.12336156

>>12333494
199 base 10 for example is 1 * 10^2 + 9 * 10^1 + 9 * 10^0
26 in base 2 would be 1 * 2^4 + 1 * 2^3 + 0 * 2^2 + 1 * 2^1 + 0 * 2^0 = 11010
16 in base 3 would be 1 * 3^2 + 2 * 3^1 + 1 * 3^0 = 121
I hope this helps.

>> No.12336213

>>12330309

> image doesn't have roman numerals
> image doesn't have zeckendorf representation or negafibonacci
> image doesn't have base -1+i
> image doesn't have base -2 (negabinary)
> image doesn't have stern-brocot
> image doesn't have IEEE 754 floating point
> image doesn't have 2's complement
> image doesn't have unary
> image doesn't have any irrational base
> image doesn't have any transcendental base
> image doesn't even have mixed radix
> image doesn't even have https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_numeral_systems

bases 12,60,120,360 are 100% certified ARBITRARY, and therefore just as cringe as the metric system. Anyway, there's infinite potential to flex math knowledge in this meme image, and you failed because you're lost pol overflow and don't know shit about math

>> No.12336248

>Almost 60 replies
>no balanced ternary
>no senary
>no residue number system

>> No.12336274

base 6 - seximal

>> No.12336542

Binary. Multiplication is piss easy to do in this base.

>> No.12336554

>>12336542
>multiplication
You're probably thinking of minimization, which is equivalent to multiplication in binary, but more fundamental.
The general arithmetic multiplication is a place-value shift, and it is equally easy (or hard) to do in any base.

>> No.12336568

>>12330506
Based.

>> No.12336590

>>12330506
How would that even work?
0, 00, 000....?
But 0*1^1+0*1^2+0*1^3=0*1^1+0*1^2=0*1^1=0.

>> No.12336611
File: 1.99 MB, 1280x1279, cat smug pinkbow aristocrat mirror.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12336611

10 fingers
base 10
simple as.

>> No.12336631

>>12336590
That's the point: it doesn't work. It's nonsense. It's poking fun at everyone else in the thread.

>> No.12337283

>>12336590
you use 1 as the only digit, no zeroes.