From: joedees@bellsouth.net
Date: Tue Jan 08 2002 - 21:56:22 MST
On 8 Jan 2002 at 21:06, ben wrote:
> I'm a fairly lacking mathematician, but here's my 2 cents worth:
>
> Base 16 (hex) is nearly just as easy to picture mentally, and you can count
> on your fingers in binary with a little practise (with a limit of 2047, not
> 10!) Base16 converts easily to binary (and vice-versa), which is why it's
> used in programming.
>
> Also, a base 26 alphabet is not neccessarily crucial to the english language
> as it is spoken. think of all the sounds that need to be represented by a
> combination of letters (ch, sh, ng, th...) A base 32 alphabet would be more
> representative of the number of phenomes we are capable of producing, and
> once again could be useful in numerical representation because of the easy
> conversion to Base16.
>
possibly, but our history is replete (indeed it is comprised of0 the
successes we have had with separate alphabetic (literature( and
numeric (mathematics) bases. I am of the opinion that to combine the
two would complexify the hybrid far beyond the point of diminishing
returns.
>
> -ben
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <joedees@bellsouth.net>
> To: <virus@lucifer.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2002 4:00 PM
> Subject: RE: GIGO RE: virus: Weird claims about PI - the sloka
>
>
> On 8 Jan 2002 at 12:42, Yash wrote:
>
> One of the main problems is incompatible bases; base 10 seems to be
> ideal for our mathematical use, and base 26 is alphabetically necessary
> in the English language. In fact, a base of much less than 26 would
> preclude our being able to create such a voluminous and
> distinguishable vocabulary of relatively short words or represent all the
> sounds we employ in speech, but a base of more than 10 would be a
> monster to master for most people (our ten counting digits (fingers)
> make base 10 more user friendly in the sense that if any genetic
> predisposition exists for any base, it most probably exists for base 10).
> For these reasons we keep numbers (arithmetic) and letters (language)
> separate, and use a composite alphanumeric system.
> >
> > I think you're right.
> >
> > Except for the Vedic 'BS' part.
> >
> > Mnemonics do exist and there's nothing particularly 'BS' about that one.
> > Well not if you subscribe to the 'Dates' and 'origin' which Hermit has
> > mentioned himself on his own and got himself all excited about.
> >
> > Yash.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-virus@lucifer.com [mailto:owner-virus@lucifer.com]On Behalf
> > Of Kalkor
> >
> > The impression I got was that Yash was proposing the construction of a
> > language wherein everything has multiple meanings, and great depth of
> > information can be stored. He used the vedic PI BS as an example.
> >
> > Yash, you might have better luck using analogy next time, as certain
> people
> > in here seem to have latched onto the validity of your example (or lack
> > thereof) and missed the concept for which the example was given in the
> first
> > place...
> >
> > Maybe parable?
> >
> > I maintain that any language we were to create that fit these criteria
> would
> > just confuse the hell out of me, and I want no part of it, I tell you!!!!
> > ;-}
> >
> > Kalkor
> >
> >
> > _________________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Sep 25 2002 - 13:28:38 MDT