“which scientists claim are more accurate than any available today.”
No they obviously do not. Yeah the fractions are easier in base 60, but they are not more accurate than just using rational numbers or radicals in any other base.
“10” is a square that’s also the product of two squares, 4 and 9
highly divisible, being able to simply express halves, thirds, quarters, sixths, and ninths, also twelfths and eighteenths but those are less common portions in daily use
you can represent it as [0 - Z], as in “…8, 9, A, B, C…”, it’s literally achieved by just adding the alphabet to the numeral system.
Yeah fuck that upworthy spam. Here’s the original article from The Guardian.
Not significantly better:
“which scientists claim are more accurate than any available today.”
No they obviously do not. Yeah the fractions are easier in base 60, but they are not more accurate than just using rational numbers or radicals in any other base.
I’m partial to base 36
“10” is a square that’s also the product of two squares, 4 and 9
highly divisible, being able to simply express halves, thirds, quarters, sixths, and ninths, also twelfths and eighteenths but those are less common portions in daily use
you can represent it as [0 - Z], as in “…8, 9, A, B, C…”, it’s literally achieved by just adding the alphabet to the numeral system.
It is significantly better, it’s not spam reposting crap.
Thank you. I wasn’t going to click on that trash.
deleted by creator