At first glance 60 is superior to 10 because of the large number of factors it has. The factors of 60 are 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 10, 12, 15, 20, 30, 60; that is 12 factors! The number 10 only has 1, 2, 5, 10. Also notable is that the factors of 60 contain the low more commonly used numbers. Very rarely do I have more than 6 of a thing on my person. Just right now I have 4 pens, 1 helmet, 5 notebooks, and 2 waterproof clothes in my bag.
Having many factors could be important because it allows for simpler fractions. 60 divided by all its factors will produce nice non-decimal numbers. I could imagine an ancient tribe seeing a decimal number as their math “breaking.” So, through a trial-and-error method, a base 60 system caused their math to break the least.
We still use base 60s for time keeping. After some research, we also use it for measuring angles and China uses base 60 for many of their astronomical systems. The closest I can think of is that there are 12 inches in a foot, but that is not exactly base 60. There was a push for a metric time-keeping system, but it seemed that humans were much less willing to accept it. It seems like time is so intrinsic to human perception of our world that we are unwilling to change it. This reminds me of how there was a pushback to the ideas that time was a dimension of spacetime.
My research has shown that this idea was more or less the acceptable idea of the justification for the base 60 system. I have enjoyed learning about these Babylonian systems via my own private research in the past, and parts of this knowledge has luckily stuck in my brain. I am very happy that I am in this class, officially learning things that I have only dabbled in.
Hi Evan, interesting take on the utility of base 60 versus 10 in terms of what one carries with them. Recognising that the following question is beyond the scope of this particular prompt, I wonder: are there other bases that you would want to explore for fun in your future classroom?
ReplyDelete