Scratch
archived forums
#1 2011-12-30 18:26:56
- midnightleopard
- Scratcher
- Registered: 2007-09-13
- Posts: 1000+
Rant on the decimal system
**The following is based on a weird thought I had**
Sup Scratch. Recently, I learned how to change numerical bases. Base 2 is binary, Base 3 is Ternary, Base 16 is Hexadecimal and what not.
I figured out that computers use binary because you have two numbers, which can be emulated by ons and offs. Very cool. I also learned that code is written with hexadecimal, because you can accomplish bigger numbers with less digits, therefore, process it faster.
100 = 64 (saved one digit, one microsecond of processing!)
So that got me thinking, why don't we always use base 16? As a species, we could save milliseconds of time, which would build up, letting our species time to think about other important things. I asked my math teacher and he said it was because we can count base ten on our fingers. I haven't needed to count on my fingers since I was in kindergarten.
That gave me the idea of having little kids wear base-16 abacuses on their wrists, therefore eliminating the only reason the decimal system is used.
Then I thought even more, why stop at 16? We have 26 letters in the alphabet to use as constants. In fact, we have a capital and lowercase symbol for each letter. That's 52 characters we can use as constants.
Forget Hexadecimal, why don't we use a base-62 system?
I'll answer that myself. Little kids don't know how to read all the letters.
100 (Decimal) = 64 (Hex) = 1B (Base-62)
Hmm... that didn't accomplish much. Okay, base 16 it is.
Well, anyways, I am going to attempt to use hexadecimal more often than decimal. Wish me luck.
Offline
#4 2011-12-30 18:33:43
- midnightleopard
- Scratcher
- Registered: 2007-09-13
- Posts: 1000+
Re: Rant on the decimal system
mattb777 wrote:
Calculating things with multiples of 10 is WAY easier than multiples of 16.
Well, once the 16 system is adopted, you won't need to multiply by 16 anymore. That's because
10 (hex) = 16 (Decimal)
Offline
#5 2011-12-30 20:10:50
- midnightleopard
- Scratcher
- Registered: 2007-09-13
- Posts: 1000+
Re: Rant on the decimal system
Last edited by midnightleopard (2011-12-30 20:10:59)
Offline
#6 2011-12-30 20:54:58
- SpaceManMike
- Scratcher
- Registered: 2008-02-09
- Posts: 100+
Re: Rant on the decimal system
midnightleopard wrote:
**The following is based on a weird thought I had**
Sup Scratch. Recently, I learned how to change numerical bases. Base 2 is binary, Base 3 is Ternary, Base 16 is Hexadecimal and what not.
I figured out that computers use binary because you have two numbers, which can be emulated by ons and offs. Very cool. I also learned that code is written with hexadecimal, because you can accomplish bigger numbers with less digits, therefore, process it faster.
100 = 64 (saved one digit, one microsecond of processing!)
So that got me thinking, why don't we always use base 16? As a species, we could save milliseconds of time, which would build up, letting our species time to think about other important things. I asked my math teacher and he said it was because we can count base ten on our fingers. I haven't needed to count on my fingers since I was in kindergarten.
That gave me the idea of having little kids wear base-16 abacuses on their wrists, therefore eliminating the only reason the decimal system is used.
Then I thought even more, why stop at 16? We have 26 letters in the alphabet to use as constants. In fact, we have a capital and lowercase symbol for each letter. That's 52 characters we can use as constants.
Forget Hexadecimal, why don't we use a base-62 system?
I'll answer that myself. Little kids don't know how to read all the letters.
100 (Decimal) = 64 (Hex) = 1B (Base-62)
Hmm... that didn't accomplish much. Okay, base 16 it is.
Well, anyways, I am going to attempt to use hexadecimal more often than decimal. Wish me luck.
uhhhhhh....
DIDN'T REAL LOL
Offline
#7 2011-12-30 21:44:07
Re: Rant on the decimal system
You would have to change nearly everything in the world and quite possibly overhaul the entire education system, as well as having to redo every textbook with numbers in it. All the page numbers would be wrong. Everyone used to the decimal system would be lost (like old people).
Offline
#8 2011-12-30 21:47:26
- Albertt911
- Scratcher
- Registered: 2010-09-28
- Posts: 1000+
Re: Rant on the decimal system
You lost me after you said bases...
'The only problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are so certain of themselves, and the wise so full of doubt.'
Offline
#9 2011-12-30 23:08:27
Re: Rant on the decimal system
Albertt911 wrote:
You lost me after you said bases...
http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Base_(mathematics)
The real article is really hard to understand.
Offline
#10 2011-12-30 23:35:41
- Laternenpfahl
- Scratcher
- Registered: 2011-06-24
- Posts: 1000+
Re: Rant on the decimal system
Decimal makes sense. Think: HANDS!
Offline
#11 2011-12-31 10:22:30
- midnightleopard
- Scratcher
- Registered: 2007-09-13
- Posts: 1000+
Re: Rant on the decimal system
SpaceManMike wrote:
uhhhhhh....
DIDN'T REAL LOL
Was that an attempt at tl;dr?
Offline
#12 2011-12-31 10:30:33
- 16Skittles
- Scratcher
- Registered: 2009-08-26
- Posts: 1000+
Re: Rant on the decimal system
this is like 0123456789ABCDEF right? you try calculating 4A*3F all the time. too confusing. possibly, we could teach it to the math teachers, teach it to the new kids, then wait for all the people using base-10 to die off 
Offline
#13 2011-12-31 10:42:12
Re: Rant on the decimal system
We chose base ten because it's a nice easy way of calculating things - I suppose we like to keep zeros around? 
Or perhaps because it's always been done that way with Arabic numerals, and it would be terribly difficult to reeducate the world on all that. It's like with feet and inches: it's the most obscure form of measurement ever (and, as a Canadian, I rarely have to deal with yards, ounces, etc), but a lot of people still use it just because that's the way it's always been used. Fortunately, we mostly learn about the metric system in Canada.
Offline