@[email protected] to Science [email protected]English • 8 months agoOr we could do metric timefiles.catbox.moeimagemessage-square197fedilinkarrow-up1954arrow-down138
arrow-up1916arrow-down1imageOr we could do metric timefiles.catbox.moe@[email protected] to Science [email protected]English • 8 months agomessage-square197fedilink
minus-square@[email protected]linkfedilinkEnglish5•8 months agoWith base 12 you can actually get a result for 1/3
minus-squareKaityylinkfedilinkEnglish12•8 months agoBig Decimal has brainwashed the population into thinking that 5 is a good number instead of the terrible prime number that it is. It should be clumped in with 7 and 11 as Bad Numbers when you’re dealing with anything except for 10s.
minus-square@[email protected]linkfedilinkEnglish11•8 months agoYes, but having 2, 3, 4, 6 as factors is way better than having only 2 and 5. We’d be giving up one factor to add three.
With base 12 you can actually get a result for 1/3
But not for 1/5
Big Decimal has brainwashed the population into thinking that 5 is a good number instead of the terrible prime number that it is. It should be clumped in with 7 and 11 as Bad Numbers when you’re dealing with anything except for 10s.
Yes, but having 2, 3, 4, 6 as factors is way better than having only 2 and 5. We’d be giving up one factor to add three.