Steve Sloan wrote: > Not if you routinely have to divide numbers into thirds or > sixths, something that's not too uncommon in the real world. > Thirds and sixths are pretty common in nature. 12 is evenly > divisible by 2, 3, 4, and 6, a much better list of factors > than the puny 2 and 5 you get with base 10.
Don't deal enough with fractions, I guess, to care. Also, by this reasoning the best bet is Base 60 (used by the Sumerians). I'm not sure I'd care to use Base 60 for all numbers. Also, my real world prefers metric and things that were designed to the fit the radix we use daily, instead of historical oddities. > > and all the more ridiculous for your religious ranting > > and racism. > > I didn't see either of those things in Robert's post. Covert in post, overt in referenced website of poster. -- --Max Battcher-- http://www.worldmaker.net/ All progress is based upon a universal innate desire on the part of every organism to live beyond its income. --Samuel Butler _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
