[ 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: 537 KB, 1920x1032, math.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3379565 No.3379565 [Reply] [Original]

Am I the only one who can't fathom why people count 10 as a number?

>> No.3379571

Perhaps this will help

num·ber/ˈnəmbər/
Verb: Amount to (a specified figure or quantity); comprise.
Noun: An arithmetical value, expressed by a word or symbol, representing a particular quantity and used in counting, calculating, and for showing order in a series or for identification.

>> No.3379574

In life you either one thing or nothings.

Why?

>> No.3379577

Uh, yes.

>> No.3379579

the aspergers is strong in this one

>> No.3379587

this is the most retarded shit i've ever read

(excluding the religion troll threads, and that one guy who said that a cube should be measured in ft^2 because ft^3 looked stupid)

>> No.3379590

most people have ten fingers.
fingers are useful for counting.
you're a faggot.

>> No.3379593

So why does the value go up when the quantity stays the same?

Why do we have a 10 dollar bill?

>> No.3379604

This is worse than Timecube.

>> No.3379609

>Am I the only one who can't fathom why people count 10 as a number?
um, what.

I think you're confusing numbers and the number of distinct symbols used to represent them. 10 is most definitely a number.

>> No.3379619

>>3379587

You know, every time I go on to /sci/ this is all I hear but all of you just leave it at the argument "that's retarded" and move on. Why are you guys such trolls? I've stated logic, what's the flaw?

If you can find it and guide me, then awesome, if not, I'm still confused.

>> No.3379628

>>3379619
You have done nothing but make and indirect assertion that 10 is not a number.

>> No.3379636

>>3379619
>I've stated logic
good, one more word (including number) which you don't know the meaning of. maybe if you explain why you dont think its a number people will respond in a nice way.

>> No.3379647

>>3379609

I don't want to seem like I'm arguing but 10 is a concept, not a quantity. You're saying there's 1 (9/9) whole system and a (0/9) system. There is nothing in the universe more than 9. Once there's 9 of any thing it becomes 1 whole.

>>3379590

We have 5 fingers on each hand, not 10 fingers. One positive 5 one negative 5. Counting each finger from 1 to 10 is a gross error in human over simplicity.

>> No.3379670

Excellent trolling.

>> No.3379671

>>3379636
All I've been was nice and sincere. In fact you guys are the ones trolling.

It's very simple:

When you count 10 things do you count:

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 0?

No, you say 10 because you think 10 is one more than 9. But it's actually saying 0. You're counting a quantity that doesn't exist.

What you should be counting is

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ...

You guys are a product of a system that made you too intelligent for your own good. Be dumb for a second. Ask why.

>> No.3379680

The zero acts as a placeholder.

>> No.3379682

>>3379671
what about hexidecimal?

>> No.3379690

>>3379680

Exactly, but why count that zero as a quantity? Why do you act like 10 it's greater than 9 when in reality it's basically the same as 9.

>> No.3379694

Try binary without zero's you gigantic faggot.

>> No.3379697
File: 30 KB, 360x300, 070814borismain.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3379697

>>3379690
And what about those bendy buses too!
Good show OP!! Fancy a game of Wiff Waff?

>> No.3379703

Because we count in base 10 not base 9...

>> No.3379704

>>3379690
so you want to know why we dont work in base 9? is that it?

>> No.3379705

>>3379690
You're not meant to count it as a quantity. You're meant to count ten as a 1 in the tens column and a zero in the ones column.

Saging because even though I find this entertaining and it's maths-related, you're an obvious troll.

>> No.3379719

>>3379694

I didn't mention this before, but I might as well now: zero is EXTREMELY important. It's absolutely necessary. There are instances in a system where the whole system MUST restart to 0. Can you reach 0 minutes in an hour? Sure, as soon as the next hour comes. However in the REAL WORLD you should never count it as a quantity since it can't be used. Try to drive 0 cars.

>> No.3379731

>>3379647

>one negative 5

>one
>5

These two are mutually exclusive.
Learn classical mathematics.

>> No.3379734

>>3379704

Bingo.

>> No.3379743

>>3379671

>You're counting a quantity that doesn't exist.

You obviously dont know what quantity is.
Why dont you provide us a definition of what "quantity" is?

>> No.3379750

>>3379705

Still, how much is '1 in the 10s column' equivalent to in ones?

I'm sorry you think I'm trolling. I'm trying to find out why we've been fucking up math all this time, personally and came here because maybe someone thought this before.

>> No.3379751

>>3379671

>10 is one more than 9. But it's actually saying 0

10-9=1

1 is not 0

This is elementary school mathematics.

>> No.3379752

>>3379565
I'm not sure if you are trolling, confused or genuinely retarded. Nobody has ever said that 9 things = 1 in the tens column its 9+1 things = 1 in tens column, thats why its called the fucking tens column.

>> No.3379757

>>3379579
I lol'd

>> No.3379758

>>3379750

>1 in the 10s column

Explain.

>> No.3379772

>>3379671

Haha a child doesnt know how to count.
Why didnt you take summer classes?

>> No.3379774

make up your minds idiots
either 10 means 1 + 0 = 1 like OP suggests with a looping number system such as 1 2 3 ... 7 8 9 1 2 3 ...
or it means 1 * 0 = 0 so, 1 2 3 ... 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 ...
why can't you idiots understand the nonsense of what you're writing, i think you've just become acclimatised to assuming the stupidity

>> No.3379784

>>3379774

THANK YOU. Finally.

>> No.3379799

>>3379671
No thats wrong when we count we say


0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, (9+1)+0, (9+1)+1,(9+1)+2...

where the 9+1 is represented by a 1 in the tens column

For some reason you are assuming that 9 = a 1 in the tens column instead of 9+1 which is what it really is.

>> No.3379807

>>3379758

So if we put a checkmark in the 10s column, how many numbers do we put down in the ones column to get there? 9. How many checkmarks do we put in the ones column after we put a checkmark in the 10s? 0. So how many checkmarks do we have total?

9.

>> No.3379814

It's just base 10. Would it please you if we invented a new symbol every time we wanted to add one?

>> No.3379815

>>3379774
>either 10 means 1 + 0 = 1 like OP suggests with a looping number system such as 1 2 3 ... 7 8 9 1 2 3 ...
o>r it means 1 * 0 = 0 so, 1 2 3 ... 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 ...
It means neither of those things
It's a quantity equal to 9+1. we use the combination of symbols "10" because if we didn't, we would need an entirely new symbol to symbolize 9+1. And then how would we symbolize 9+2? Would you rather 91 equaled 9+1? But then how would we symbolize 9+9+9+9+9+9+9+9+9+9+1? 99999999991?

>> No.3379819

Why use numerals at all. Just make one mark for each item.

This is a pepperoni: o
Mmm. I love pepperonis.

I have three pepperonis: o o o
Now I have ten: o o o o o o o o o o
Twenty? o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o

What is the big deal?

>> No.3379824

>>3379807
No you don't if you have 9 checkmarks you don't put anything in the tens column you leave it blank. You only put 1 in the tens column if you have 9 checkmarks PLUS one more checkmark ie 9+1 checkmarks.

>> No.3379825

>>3379819
I have 10,000 pepperonis.
10,000 is much, much easier to write than making 10,000 little symbols.

>> No.3379829

>>3379799

But can't you agree that saying (9+1) + 3 is complicated and messy? Wouldn't it be simpler to say we have 1 organized, usable thing of a system of 9 and 3 unorganized things?

>> No.3379835
File: 128 KB, 800x562, green-marble-counting-ten_medium[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3379835

FUCK!
I guess I don't have a number of marbles.

OP, can you tell me how many marbles I have, since 10 is not a number? What is the number of marbles that I have?

>> No.3379838

>>3379815
you're assuming 9 + 1 exists in order to justify your number system, and then using your number system to justify your claim that 9 + 1 exists.
i never thought i would see cyclical fallacies in /sci/

>> No.3379840

>>3379838
9+1 does exist. I can prove it.
Go get 9 pencils.
Then go get 1 more.
How many pencils do you have?

>> No.3379844

>>3379814

It would please me if we had a logical system with inverse symbols that inevitably make up a whole. But we're not talking that right now. We're talking about why 10 isn't a litteral number.

>> No.3379854

>>3379840

That's what I'm asking. How many pencils do you have?

(9/9) + (1/9)
"11"

or

(9/9) + (imaginary 1 from 0)

"10"

>> No.3379856

Whilst OP is being retarded, I do agree with him in a sense. I dislike the fact that we use base-10 - there's no logic behind it beyond the fact that we have 10 fingers. If it were up to me we'd all be using base-8 - it can be divided by itself multiple times without descending into fractions, and it's not too large that the number of symbols gets awkward (as would start to be the case and moved to the next logical one, base-16. Though I wouldn't mind that either).

>> No.3379859

>>3379835

I'm not even sure myself anymore!

>> No.3379870
File: 161 KB, 311x311, all troll'd.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3379870

/sci/ newfriend here. Is this place always so easy to troll?

>> No.3379871

>>3379840
i have 9 + 1 pencils. i don't have the number 10. moron.

>> No.3379864 [DELETED] 

>mfw OP doesn't understand number systems.

If you were trying to use binary (a base 2 number system), would you tell me that 100 did not exist?

>> No.3379876

>>3379871
Wrong, you have 8 + 2 pencils.

>> No.3379877

>>3379856

You know, for intelligent human beings you guys seem to like to use the word retard a lot. I agree with you, base 8 is the way to go. Counting to 9 is a given whole for a system.

>> No.3379878

>>3379829
>Wouldn't it be simpler to say we have 1 organized, usable thing of a system of 9 and 3 unorganized things?

BUT WE FUCKING DON'T WE HAVE 9+1 not 9 GET THAT THROUGH YOUR FUCKING HEAD. That organized usable thing of a system you keep talking about? Thats 9+1 not 9.

>> No.3379883

>>3379870
Yep.

>> No.3379888

o o o o o o o o o/o o o o o o o o o o

almost got me

>> No.3379889

>>3379859

Then your number system is incorrect.

>> No.3379894

Its notation, a symbol representing:

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 this many items

it is represented as 10 because we use a base 10 system where the unit section represents
(the number there)*10^0
and the number next to it represents
(the number there)*10^1

Its just a way of showing it:
10 in base 2: 1010
10 in base 3: 101
10 in base 4: 22
10 in base 5: 20
10 in base 6: 14
10 in base 7: 13
10 in base 8: 12
10 in base 9: 11
10 in base 10: 10

>> No.3379907

>>3379877

Bad habit I guess, but it is such a satisfying word to use.

Base-8 just... makes sense. 8/2=4, 4/2=2, 2/2=1. 10/2=5, 5/2=2.5, 2.5/2=1.25. It's just so much neater.

>> No.3379914

>>3379889

It's not MY number system. I'm not claiming that I "found" anything. This is always how things were. If you have something, then it counts as 1, if you have nothing it counts as 0. You guys are saying "I have 10 marbles" when in reality you have what we would translate to as 11. I'm hesitant to use '11', though since it would confuse you (confused me too) but trust me, it's not simply '10'.

>> No.3379932

>>3379870
>/sci/ newfriend here. Is this place always so easy to troll?

It's easier than this. You can just post an image that says "atheists?" and get 250+ replies.

>> No.3379944

>>3379914

I never declared that it is number 10.
However your number system is incorrect.
Work on it.

>> No.3379947

>>3379914

2 + 2 is .... 10

What now, OP?

>> No.3379965

Does OP really not understand basic notation, or what is this?

Each place represents a different order of magnitude, quantities multiplied by 10 (oooooooooo). "10" means 1 group of oooooooooo and 0 extra o's. Where is the problem?

>> No.3379967

>>3379965
It's trolling.

>> No.3379971

ITT bitches argue about numeral systems that merely NOTATE numbers
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Numeral_system
numbers exist with or without a notation system
lrn2axio-deductive mathematics

>> No.3379978

>>3379971
> implying numbers exist
rofl, tell me next time you see the number 7 bro lolololo

>> No.3379996

10 is X.
Roman Numerals ftw.
Also I think "ten" came before "zero" in concept, so 9+1 = 0 ("ten") 10 = ("one ten")

>> No.3379999

>>3379978
>implying truth exists
tell me next time you see lololol

>> No.3380006

1+1 = 10
2+1 = 10
2+2 = 10, 1+3 = 10
4+1 = 10, 3+2 = 10
1+5 = 10, 2 +4 = 10, 3+3 = 10
1+6 = 10, 2+5 = 10, 3+4 = 10
1+7 = 10, 2+6 = 10, 3+5 = 10, 4+4 = 10
1+8 = 10, 2+7 = 10, 3+6 = 10, 4+5 = 10
1+9 = 10, 2+8 = 10, 3+7 = 10, 4+6 =10, 5+5 = 10

Stop feeding the troll.

>> No.3380010

What is a zero thought?

>> No.3380015

A Japanese fighter plane>>3380010

>> No.3380160

>>3379671


okay, then how many dollar signs are below?


$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

>> No.3380168

decimal numbers are shorthand for a power series with x=1/10

how fucking hard is that to understand?

>> No.3380173

>>3379671
Oh I see what you mean. We should use our numbers modulo 9. It sure would be useful to restrict ourselves to having only 9 distinct expressible values. Even more helpful that division isn't always possible modulo 9

>> No.3380176

>division isn't always possible modulo 9
does that make sense?

>> No.3380212

>>3380176
Yeah, try to find the multiplicative inverse of 3 or 6 modulo 9

>> No.3380232

>>3380212
I don't think I understand the terminology.
3 mod 9 = 3. 1/3 * 3 = 1.

>> No.3380247

>>3380232
Too bad modular arithmetic is by definition restricted to integers. No room for rational numbers.

On the other hand, 4 does have a multiplicative inverse modulo 9, namely 7.

4*7 = 28, and 28 is congruent to 1 modulo 9

>> No.3380257

>>3379825

no it isn't

>> No.3380263
File: 67 KB, 512x384, 1310078092184.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3380263

>this thread

hey op get back to me once you build a 5-mile suspension bridge doing all your calculations without 10

>> No.3380295

>>3380247
o i c what u mean now.
But I still don't understand your assertion of
>division isn't always possible
 
Who said rational numbers have no place?

>> No.3380299
File: 10 KB, 280x210, FAR017.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3380299

>>3380263

maybe if we used a number system not based on logical fallacy we wouldn't have so many disasters like this one.

>> No.3380308

>>3380299

>if we had a different number system, we wouldn't have resonance frequencies.

Wat?

>> No.3380314

fail thread

OP doesn't get that a number and the quantity it represents are two distinct things.

>> No.3380339
File: 19 KB, 250x250, folder.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3380339

>>3380308

>implying the Tacoma-Narrows collapsed because of excessive wind speeds causing a resonant feedback loop and not because we use the number 10

>> No.3380357
File: 45 KB, 600x600, 1310406872750.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3380357

>>3380299

>> No.3380457

>>3379565

ITT:

OP causes a massive logic failure on himself;
Everyone else gets trolled by themselves;
Dumping ground for failure

>> No.3380462
File: 48 KB, 375x375, George-costanza[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3380462

>>3380339

>Using a Base 10 number system

I really hope you guys don't do this.

>> No.3380464

>>3379565

no. lots of people are to stupid to realize that our decimal system is only one way of organising and infinite system of real numbers, N.

>> No.3380468

Cause we have 10 fingers
Duh

>> No.3380472

going in circles now

>> No.3380479

Why the hell people are saying we use a base-10 numeric system because of hands???
If that was true we would use a base 11 numeric system, from 0 to 10

>> No.3380481

>>3379565

stop arguing, faggots. OP has actually constructed his own number system.

units digit = number mod 9

tens digit = divide the number by 9 and drop the remainder.

OP's fail logic comes from trying to equate the common base-10 representation of some number and his own representation.

>> No.3380483

>>3380479
derp

>> No.3380486

>>3380479
u count 0 on your fingers, why?

>> No.3380500

>>3380486
>u count 0 on your fingers, why?
I (well we) dont count thats why we would have a base 11,
we would count from 1 to 10 (lets say A) using our fingers

>> No.3380504

>>3380492
u really that stupid? 0 is not a number, its an idea, like infinity.

>> No.3380508

Base 8 is for pussies. Base 10 is okay. If you pick base 9, it's okay too, I guess.. though you should probably have someone look at that...

>> No.3380517

>>3380504
>u really that stupid? 0 is not a number, its an idea, like infinity.
that is why I was saying we would have a base 11 if it was created base on fingers numbers

finger 1 = 1
finger 2 = 2
finger 3 = 3
finger 4 = 4
finger 5 = 5
finger 6 = 6
finger 7 = 7
finger 8 = 8
finger 9 = 9
finger 10 = A

>> No.3380526

>>3380517
U dun goofed
10 fingers, but 11 symbols. Your justification for this choice is now gone.

>> No.3380527

>>3380500

>I (well we) dont count thats why we would have a base 11

Except we wouldnt.
You dont know how to count.
You have failed basic Mathematics.

>> No.3380531

>>3380517

And finger 11 = A1, that is base 10.

Im outta here.

>> No.3380536

If 4/9 is 0.4444444 and 7/9 is 0.77777777, 9/9 should be 0.9999999, yet it's 1.

>> No.3380538

>>3380517

>mfw doesn't know what bases are.
xD
>mfw A is just as useful as 0.

>> No.3380539

>>3380526
>10 fingers, but 11 symbols. Your justification for this choice is now gone.
But we dont count the first symbol, that is the 0 thats why we would need 11 symbols, because we dont count like that "0, 1, 2,3.... 9" when counting your fingers

>> No.3380551

Still struggling in solidarity with the Aztecs, eh?

>> No.3380561

>>3380539
Show me how you write the number 11 (base ten) in your system.

>> No.3380570

>>3380531
>And finger 11 = A1, that is base 10.
We dont have 11 fingers.
Also in base 11 after A we have 10 not A1

>> No.3380574

>>3380561

>Show me how you write the number 11 (base ten) in your system.

What an idiot.

>> No.3380577

IIT: people who cannot possibly fathom quaternions.

>> No.3380587 [DELETED] 

>>3380561
>Show me how you write the number 11 (base ten) in your system.
WUT??? I was not talking about base 11 that we would have a base 11 if the base was choosed based on number of fingers.

But talking about I count 11 in base ten, I count it as 11

>> No.3380585

>>3380574
Methinks you have misunderstood.
He answered what I asked here
>>3380570

>> No.3380592

>>3380570
Fine, but I don't see any advantage of working in base eleven. And, to be sure we're on the same page, you're still using 0.

>> No.3380612

>>3380592
>Fine, but I don't see any advantage of working in base eleven. And, to be sure we're on the same page, you're still using 0.
I was not saying it was a advantage, i was just saying we would have a base 11 if we choosed it base on numbers of fingers, because we dont use 0 to count the first symbol and we would need one more symbol to count the final finger.
Yes we are still using 0 in a base 11, but since we dont using it to count the first finger we would need one more symbol

>> No.3380643

>>3380612
Zero is a symbol. Deal with it. We have ten fingers, and use base ten.

>> No.3380663

>>3380612
But you don't seem to understand that the base 10 system which is (likely) based on the number of fingers was created before 0 existed. I think we have simplified it enough, why do you insist on complicating it?

>> No.3380671

>>3380643
>implying I was proposing a change
I was just saying why saying that we choosed base 10 because of our finger numbers is wrong

>> No.3380681

>>3380671
Really? Really? We use base 10, we have given extra uses to the 0 to reduce the complexity avoiding this "extra" symbol. Like it or not, we do indeed have 10 fingers and we do indeed use a base 10 numbering system.

>> No.3380694

>>3380663
>was created before 0 existed.
I didnt new it. Sorry
Case closed.
Just a question what symbol they used to the symbol 10

>> No.3380703

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babylonian_numerals
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maya_numerals
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_numerals

>> No.3380714

>>3380694
Loled how the lack of just one simple information can lead to many many posts

>> No.3380730
File: 21 KB, 220x221, 1308689570353.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3380730

I know this is a troll thread but i'll respond anyways:

this post just shows how a trickster can fool dumb people with an error in logic and misunderstanding of how things work.

each digit represents a number 0-9

for example,

n = 1280 = abcd (per position, not multiplcation)

numeric placement indicates what factor of 10 the digit represents.
a = x1000
b = x100
c = x10
d = x1

Therefore, we have:

a = 1x1000
b = 2x100
c = 8x10
d = 0x1

Grand total = 1280

Damn you troll who made me type all this out.

>> No.3380740

>>3380714
I find it profound. It just illuminates the mystical quality of zero.

>> No.3380789
File: 161 KB, 650x520, FuckingLOL.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3380789

In the off chance that OP is an absolute retard, i may just be able to explain it to him...

in your image, you state that 9= 1 unit of tens. the problem you are having is not realizing that the units of tens occupy a numerical value as well. ( the big square around the 9 small blocks also counts as a block)

Ah the wonders of troll science.