From bob@RATTLESNAKE.COM Tue Nov 13 16:22:08 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: bob@rattlesnake.com X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_0_1); 14 Nov 2001 00:22:08 -0000 Received: (qmail 62409 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2001 00:22:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (216.115.97.167) by m3.grp.snv.yahoo.com with QMQP; 14 Nov 2001 00:22:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost) (140.186.114.245) by mta1.grp.snv.yahoo.com with SMTP; 14 Nov 2001 00:22:02 -0000 Received: by rattlesnake.com via sendmail from stdin id (Debian Smail3.2.0.114) for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Tue, 13 Nov 2001 14:57:27 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2001 14:57:27 -0500 (EST) To: pycyn@aol.com Cc: lojban@yahoogroups.com In-reply-to: <5f.1d86e8e2.291eeca5@aol.com> (pycyn@aol.com) Subject: Re: [lojban] Re: possible A-F... Reply-to: bob@rattlesnake.com References: <5f.1d86e8e2.291eeca5@aol.com> From: "Robert J. Chassell" ... the theoretical grounds for preferring one to another of the central schemes -- 10, 12, 16 -- come down to the fractions, which are in order (with about a halving of frequency at each step) half, quarter, third, fifth, eighth, .... The *practical* grounds are that people mostly use half, third, quarter, for everyday fractions, and 12 is the smallest base that does this well. Also, you can count by fractions of 1/2, 1/3, and 1/4 on a hand, by bending your fingers forward and looking at the knuckles and finger tips. Using this method, it is easy to visualize 1/2, 1/3, and 1/4. In base-12, these are 0.6, 0.4, and 0.3. In base-10, finger fractions are much more difficult. In base-10, 1/2, 1/3, and 1/4 are 0.5, 0.3333..., and 0.25, and neither of the last two can be readily visualized by looking at your fingers. (You can readily count integers on your fingers in either base 12 or base 10. As you say, the preference depends on the fractions.) -- Robert J. Chassell bob@rattlesnake.com Rattlesnake Enterprises http://www.rattlesnake.com