Re: Metric

Sep 10, 2009 Last reply: 16 years ago 2 Replies


On 9/10/2009 2:01 PM David Nebenzahl spake thus:


>
> > On 9/10/2009 10:55 AM Morris Dovey spake thus:
>
> >> krw wrote:
>
> >>> There are 10 types of people in this world; those who can do binary
> >>> arithmetic and those who can't.
>
> >> But there's really only one type of people, those who can't do base one
> >> arithmetic. :)
>
> > Never thought about until now, but base 1 would be an impossibility, no?
> > I'm sure it would take higher mathematics (or at least higher
> > arithmetic, which does exist) to prove it, but my top-of-the-head guess
> > is that it isn't possible because each position in a written number must
> > have at least two possible symbols, as in binary.
>
> Ack! Total brain fart! Shoot me already.
>
> Of course base 1 exists, and you've probably used it many times. Think
> of the typical tally system. It's simple: the number represented equals
> the number of marks made.
>
> Duh.
>
> --
> Found--the gene that causes belief in genetic determinism

Roman numerals are some sort of tally. And whoever thought that 4 = IV has never looked at a clock with roman numerals. IIII

: Roman numerals are some sort of tally. And whoever thought that 4 = IV : has never looked at a clock with roman numerals. IIII

The Roman system is an interesting example of an astonishly bad notation that arguably held the culture back. No way to divide or multiply, for example. Or even a general method for adding and subtracting.

-- Andy Barss

Actually they did have a way to multiply. Google "Roman Numeral Multiplication" and you'll find a number of descriptions of it.

Join the Discussion

Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.

Didn't find your answer?

Ask the community — no account required