Why do people say that the convetion of using base 10 is the result of us having 10 fingers, when counting with your fingers is clearly base 11?
I have a MA in linguistics, by the way.
>>16793194No, not at the moment.
>>16793189It's 12.That's why we call it eleven and twelve, not oneteen and twoteen.You use your thumb to count your finger joints.
>>16793218Why not use your thumbs for base 14 or even your palm for base 15?
based thread
>>16793260Don't know, this is how humans counted in medieval times. Eleven, twelve, one dozen and everything else that uses base 12 comes from that time.
>>16793218No, even in that scheme, your hand can be used to distinguish between 13 different configurations, first being 0 (your thumb is not pointing at any of the phalanges), plus the 4×3 different non-zero values, that makes it base 13 with potentially two value places if you use both hands.Compared to this the naive counting approach would be base 11 with one value place.
>>16793282>NoIt is historically proofed that humans counted this way. What do you mean with "No"?Theoretically you could use base 210 if you use both hands... but this is not how humans counted.
>>16793293I literally explained to you why it's not base 12 but base 13, in the very post you replied to.That method would base 13 even if you just now came up with it, its historicity doesn't influence that the way the method works it describes a base 13 system.>base 210How does that work out?Do you mean one thumb counts 8 fingers time 3 phalanges? That's base 25 then.Or one thumb counts 8 fingers times 3 phalanges plus 2 phalanges on the other thumb? That's base 27.Or do you mean the 8 finger approach but you permit the regions the two thumbs point to to overlap so they can point to the same finger and the same phalanx even? That's still base 25 but you have two value places so you can represent 625 distinct values.If you want peak efficiency, you could have your fingers represent binary numbers, then you could show 1024 different numbers with just the fingers on your two hands.I don't see how you could get base 210.
>>16793325Actually, if you treat the metacarpals as simple phalanges (which they are, just in the palm), you could have 4 phalanges for each finger, so you could get base 33.Using both fingers overlapping you could represent 1089 values which is even better than the binary approach then.
>>16793325Historically we used our fingers to count to twelve. Why 12? I don't know but these are historically facts.>why 210Each joint of your fingers plus 2 for your thumb. 14.Once you reach 14, count 1 on your other hand. Start counting on your first hand again, if you reach 14 again, count 2 on the other hand. You get the idea. Use your palm or make a fist or whatever on your second hand too. This gives you 15, joints+thumb+palm/fist/whatever. 14×15=210. You can even go higher if you want.But this is not what humans did. They used 12.If you don't like it, invent your own system.
>>16793339Yes, and base 13 means you count to 12.You should drop the patronizing tone if you don't even know how a base/radix works. It's basic elementary level knowledge.
>>16793348>>16793339>Historically we used our fingers to count to twelve.>>16793348Yes, and base 13 means you count to 12.
>>16793348Nobody starts counting from 0 except retarded code monkey spergs./sci/ is for Fortran bvlls.
>>16793348Btw personally i use to count to 20 on each hand, 12 joints, 4 fingernails and 4 times placing the thumb on top of my fingers. This way i can count to 420 with both hands.
>>16793393>picrel>>16793381>sees a thread about finger counting fingers being base 11>remembers history trivia that medieval people counted to 12 on their hands>"it's actually 12!!" ( in the context of this thread, "it" would have to mean a base)>I point out to him that the system he presents is actually base 13 (0 to 12 -> 13 values)>"nu-uh they counted to 12"Since you clearly demonstrated that you don't know what a base means by fervently disagreeing with me when I tried to get the thread back on track, so picrel goes very much for you too.
>>16793437Oh and picrel is Introduction to Modern Algebra by Neal McCoy, third edition, pages 78 and 79.
>>16793189your micro penis doesnt count as a finger.
>>16793437Damn, your tylenol consumption must be through the roof to make these levels of autism possible
>>16793348>base 13source?
>>16793753>>16793282l2read
>>16793189>when counting with your fingers is clearly base 11?
>>16793689Damn, your clamped status must be as tight as humanly possible to make these levels of retardation possible.
>>16793689Then what wouldn't have been autistic in your eyes? Playing along that what you said isn't pure fucking brainrot?
>>16793780interesting
>>16793189ah, the elusive Chernobyl counting.
>>16793780the inventor of haikuclearly had seven fingerson his middle hand.
>>16793218You can get up to 30 if you sequencitially flex your fingers as soon as you reach the end of the phalanges.I.e. with your index finger flexed into your hand, which can count for a value of 12, you can count from 12-21 then flex the middle finger for a value of 21 and count from the ring finger etc.
>>16793189>>16793218>>16793282>>16793325You people seem to glance over something very obvious. The basis of a number system wasn't kickstarted by some overly analytical nerd who learned math for 12 years in school. It was started by a farmer counting his apples.
>>16797015No it was started by nobility figuring out how to trick farmers into growing apples for their army.
