this post was submitted on 30 Sep 2023
332 points (99.4% liked)

xkcd

12067 readers
446 users here now

A community for a webcomic of romance, sarcasm, math, and language.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

https://xkcd.com/2835

Alt text:

So what do we do when we get to base 10? Do we use A, B, C, etc? No: Numbers larger than about 3.6 million are simply illegal.

top 13 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] heavy@sh.itjust.works 54 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Finally, a system that uses more information to express less information.

[–] 22rw@feddit.de 20 points 2 years ago (1 children)

According to this article, the factoradical system gets efficient for numbers larger than 20!, but i guess this here is a shining example of ~~less is~~ more is less

[–] Sanyanov@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

It begins to improve related to regular base-10 after, well, 10!, but it takes a while to recover for lower base numbers before that.

[–] notabot@lemm.ee 21 points 2 years ago

Good grief, it's far too early in the morning for this sort of thing. My brain hurts now.

[–] OurTragicUniverse@kbin.social 15 points 2 years ago

This is cursed, haha

[–] fantoski@lemmy.world 10 points 2 years ago (3 children)

What's the point of such a system ?

[–] marcos@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago

Hum... Have you checked what site it's on?

[–] dylanTheDeveloper@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago

Idk trolling

[–] Trail@lemmy.world 7 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

This is actually a pretty cool idea.

[–] jasory@programming.dev 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Not really. The reality is that the only real metric for the utility of a notation is the speed of computation. A constant positional notation system is the most efficient, then you just optimise for a base whose multiplication table can be memorised (27 is a good one). Many people are under the impression that highly composite bases are better, but the reality is that it only optimises for euclidean division which is far out weighed by multiplication and addition (and can be easily computed using them).

[–] Trail@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

Well I didn't say practical or efficient, it's just a cool idea :)

[–] Classy@sh.itjust.works 7 points 2 years ago

0 = 0

1 = 1

2 = 10

3 = 11

4 = 20

5 = 21

6 = 100

101, 110, 111, 120, 121,

200, 201, 210, 211, 220, 221, 300, 301...

Amidoinitrite