210 = 2*3*4*5

But you do not count with your fingers now. Is counting with them a necessary first step to being able to count? I'm not sure that it is

Given that numbers are stored and calculated in binary, as far as I can tell changing the representation won't significantly slow down any computer program.

That's doable. I think the second major hurdle after learning all the symbols and words for them will be memorising the 44,100 entry containing 210 by 210 times tables.

But still I think this is doable as having 21* as many series of numbers to memorise will contain many more patterns and may even give people a better feel for numeracy, although it will take a while.

Cool idea, I already came up with what symbols to use for a few numbers. Λ = 115. Ξ = 43. χ = 158.

In base 210, show that Λ + Ξ = χ

We can remember the alphabet, so I think a nice divisible number like 36 should be the base, as it's only a few more characters.

Yeah but you have to make a song to the tune of twinkle twinkle little star

DUDEE what if we have a base where every number is literally a distinct symbol?? That would be the simplest of all!

While we are at it, why not make mandarin the official earth language.

I think the opposite would be better to gain a better understanding of numbers. Instead of using an arbitrarily large numeric base we should use base 1.

>only a few more characters
>only 184 more

A true test of intelligence is a language with only one base character, you will have to make an entire language from that character.

So lets say the character is .

. means hit
.. means bye
... means fuck you
... ... means Kill you

and so on.

Cmon smartasses makes a language involving dots.

not only is this idea retarded but the fact that you'd have to re-educate every single literate person and change every single math system shows how impractical and stupid this is.

there has to be at least two characters or you could only ever say one thing at a time

Obviously it would be phased in over a long period of time.

But it's far less clear what the pros and cons would even be with that.

>Λ = 115. Ξ = 43. χ = 158.
>In base 210, show that Λ + Ξ = χ
That's like trying to show that 2+3=5 in base ten.

>100 billion neurons
>Only ten digits
It's not the 16th century anymore, time to upgrade to base-210.

Unlock the potential.

The world would be better off without two-faced sarcastic fucks anyway

>wants to make a numerical base revolving around having a lot of factors
>doesn't even use a highly composite number
wew

It has the same con. Too many glyphs to be effective.

What would be the benefit of the base having repeated prime factors? Surely they should be unique?

That's not too big of a problem with base-210. You can start by representing each symbol as (x) where x is the nth digit, until you get around to memorising all the symbols, which you can probably do in a couple of months with minimal effort.

5!=120

Why is there a premise our number system should be based on 5 factorial? Have you decided on the symbolism?
>multiplication and division are made easier
No, no they are not

*sigh* okay, someone seems to want to learn chinese.

What you want is base 11

-11+
/11*
^11!

This kind of thread again? It has been a while.
At least make your trolling worthwhile, like with the base12 idea, where at least 12 as a base makes some sense due to some part of our current counting system already dealing with steps of twelve (months, hours)

No matter what number system you advocate, be the first to learn it and show us how much more practical it is.

why not learn binary instead? If we're choosing a different system, that is

This is a shitpost is gold.
The SUBTLE IRONY gives you a 10/10.

You and that ginger numbercuck from the dozenal fags need to never touch math again

Binary makes much more sense because it's not based on any stupid constants

We also would have the option to use hex and octal for certain situations when numbers need to be compact

Also suddenly the bitwise world would become more approachable. Imagine what would happen if we taught kids binary from day 1.

Also there is no reason to have 360 degrees instead of a power of 2 like 1024 or 256. If we are going to have an integer angle measurement, then it's objectively better because powers of 2 are divisible by two the maximum amount of times

>Also there is no reason to have 360 degrees instead of a power of 2 like 1024 or 256. If we are going to have an integer angle measurement, then it's objectively better because powers of 2 are divisible by two the maximum amount of times
why not just remove the arbitrary angle measurement and use half-turn instead.

I said if we are going to have an integer angle measurement

>Also there is no reason to have 360 degrees instead of a power of 2 like 1024 or 256. If we are going to have an integer angle measurement, then it's objectively better because powers of 2 are divisible by two the maximum amount of times
But it won't be divisible by 3. 60° and 120° angles are pretty. (It's a perfectly valid point.)

Better we no longer need numbers. Problem solved. Turn to basics of food and shelter for the masses being enough. As if?...as if all the greedy, lustful, shallow people are going to change in their lifetime. Realistically, the only hope the civilized people have is an "ignorant plague," survival by intelligence.

from your example, it has dots and spaces. like morse code

>Why is there a premise our number system should be based on 5 factorial?
It's not 5 factorial, in fact it's 210=2*3*5*7, I corrected myself here >Have you decided on the symbolism?
The symbolism is to be worked out. Each symbol should be sufficiently unique to stand out from the others, but this has to be the case for all 210, so they should be sufficiently detailed to allow for 210 uniquely recognisable symbols. For the time being, the notation discussed here can be used.

>>multiplication and division are made easier
>No, no they are not
They are once the symbols are memorised, and once the initial 210 times tables are remembered to serve as a foundation for multiplicative ability. The latter seems like a serious hurdle until you realise that difficulty diminishes very quickly as you go due to all the patterns. In the 10 times tables, 40% of the numbers are primes (2, 3, 5, 7), but with the 210 times tables, only 22% are, and the other 78% are just multiples of the prime times tables.

Imagine that youve remembered the first 210 digits of [math]\pi [/math]

Now imagine that each of those digits is a unique character.

This is the knowledge required to count to the first base in a base 210 system.
The learning curve for basic arithmatic would be exponentially more steep.

The ASCII table?

There is no extra difficulty once you've mastered basic arithmetic, and that's when the dividends start to come in. I think 210 is the largest product of consecutive primes starting with 2 which is doable as a radix. You have sizable short term costs but huge long term benefits, so it's like an investment which pays off.

How do computers work? For 1000

I agree, but it's probably never gonna happen.

You should start a small cult/enclave where only base 210 is used. Get plenty of women and make babies, so you can train them to 210 from child. Then, when society collapses next year or whenever, you can take over the world with superior arithmetic and delivery mankind from its self-imposed base 10 damnation.

>>multiplication and division are made easier
>No, no they are not
They really are. Want some examples?

>How much utility does changing to base-210 have?
Well aside from making arithmetic easier, it also makes large unwieldy numbers become managable and more intuitive to understand.

Here's some examples of the latter, using the notation (x) to denote the symbol representing the xth digit:

(Remember, every (x) would be a unique symbol)

Base 10 -> Base 210

World population

7,500,000,000 ~> (3)(179),(0)(0)(0)

Global GDP

$75,590,000,000,000 ~> $(185)(17)(0),(0)(0)(0)

Age of the Universe

13,820,000,000 ~> (7)(22),(0)(0)(0)

The Year

2017 -> (9)(127)

Why reinvent the wheel? The ubiquity of base 10 is something that our society has become acclimated to. If there was even an attempt to change to any different base, there would be so much opposition it wouldn't even be fathomable

Literally you don't need anything else apart from decimal and binary

Using unique prime factors generates more factors, However the magnitude increases dramatically and you can't divide by many practical numbers.

For example, 2310 is the product of the first consecutive primes and has a lot of factors because of that. However, it is also a huge number and you can get smaller numbers that have just as many factors by using a couple of 2's instead of a 7 or something similar. 2130 is also not divisible by 4, which would be extremely desirable for a base.

Why is divisibility by multiples of two more desirable than divisibility by another prime?

>Why reinvent the wheel?
It wouldn't be reinventing the wheel, it would be switching from horse and carriage to the automobile.

>The ubiquity of base 10 is something that our society has become acclimated to.
As addressed here it would be phased in over a period of time .

This guy gets it.

"all the symbols ... taught at an early age" if we are computers

There is one person here who noticed 3*4 is not 21

I firmly believe that it is possible. Don't sell humanity short.