• @marcos
      link
      English
      44 months ago

      Why not?

      Why not use a large prime as the base?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        84 months ago

        Honnest answer, 1/2 in DEC is 0.5 easy. 1/2 in base 13 is .6666666666… Easy but ugly. You want a base that has comon fractions easily represented by decimals. People like dozenal since many fractions are easily represented. 1/2 = 0.6, 1/3 = 0.4, 1/4 = 0.3

        I’m personally a fan of hexidecimal partly because I’m a programmer and partially because it can be halved several times

        • @bisby
          link
          English
          14 months ago

          Is 1/2 in base 13 not 0.65?

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            7
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            No, because the 5 in your answer is thinking in decimal. 0.05 is not the half of 0.1 in base 13.

        • @unreasonabro
          link
          English
          14 months ago

          it’s almost like you’d have to use a different notation system to express a different base…

      • @SmoothLiquidation
        link
        English
        34 months ago

        Ahh yes, let’s introduce floating point rounding errors for one half. Sounds fun.

      • @whotookkarl
        link
        English
        24 months ago

        Why use a fixed base? Or why not use an irrational number like e, the most efficient base

        • @marcos
          link
          English
          2
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          I still think some largish prime, like 37 hits the perfect spot of being usable enough for people to use, but still useless enough to stop almost everybody from learning any advanced math.

          But yeah, making integers non-representable is a serious trade-off that deserves consideration.