Fuck base 10. Imperial isn't "simple", but it's based purely on practicle measurements. Science-y stuff it makes sense to use metric, but it should be base 12.
Printable View
Fuck base 10. Imperial isn't "simple", but it's based purely on practicle measurements. Science-y stuff it makes sense to use metric, but it should be base 12.
Base 12's factors are better than ten, and no body needs to count on their finger parts anyway.
Metric is more of an intellectual idea , Imperial sounds more practical , it's divisible for a lot more numbers and stuff you know...
if I could I'd make a trade off between measurement systems and driving systems , we all take Imperial but Aussies and Britons quit driving on the left , I never understood why they use left handed cars while most people on earth are right handed , doesn't make sense.
Will you?
Apart from deriving from the number of fingers you have in your hands, decimal system exists along with the traditional 10 digits
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0
What digits should we add to give duodecimal system a more practical use?
A and B like in hex?
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 A B 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 1A 1B 20
21
31
41
51
61
71
81
91
A1
B1
100 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 A B 10
Would we call 10 "twelve" ? and 12 "twelve-two"?
I'm not sure if you understand the implications of such a change in the world. Blame the indians if you are not happy, but I don't believe we need such a revolution, because in fact only a small part of the world wants it. :)
I was brought up with imperial and now work mainly in Italy and had to learn metric....but in my job here (oil/drilling) everything is imperial so the Italians have to learn imperial but know nothing about inches/yards/miles etc.....:eek:
I believe there are advantages, all systems have them. Hex, for example is perfect in the sense that every new set is a power of 2.
But imagine the implication in the world of numbers: maths, economy, accountancy, education, sports. All statistics and even languages would have to be altered.
A good reform would have been a review of our calendar in 2000. It's not practical to have months with 28, 30 or 31 days in a random sequence.