• dancing_umbra@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m not defending it, but it’s because 12 has more factors than 10

      10 has 2 and 5

      But 12 has 2,3,4,6

      So 1/2 ft, 1/3 ft, 1/4ft and 1/6 ft all have a whole number of inches

      • quantenzitrone@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Using a base12 system would only make sense if we all started counting in base12 too.

        If enough people want that, i’d be down to start counting in base12, but i don’t think many people will lol.

        • p1mrx@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          1 year ago

          if we all started counting in base12 too

          You could start by calling it twelve instead of 12.

          • duffman@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            To keep things as simple/intuitive as they are today, we’d need two new symbols to represent the additional numbers. 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,§,∆,10

            Of course it would be confusing as all hell for anyone alive today.

            • stewsters@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              With hexadecimal we typically use a-f for the remaining numbers. We probably would use something like this for base 12:

              012345679ab

              Of course everyone knows the correct base to use is 2. Or as we call it, base 10.

              Actually, come to think of it, it would always be 10 in the base that it is.

      • Eufalconimorph@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        But it doesn’t use base 12. Take distance. Values smaller than 1/64" are measured using “thou”, “tenths”, and “millionths”, which are decimal multiples of 1/1000’, 1/10000", and 1/1000000" respectively.

        Values between 1/64" and 1" are measured using dyadic rationals, i.e. base-2 fractions.

        Above 1" it’s mostly base 12,except for the yard.

      • p1mrx@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        So 1/2 ft, 1/3 ft, 1/4ft and 1/6 ft all have a whole number of inches

        The same is true if you start with 300 mm instead of 1 foot.

        Though dozenal numbers with a corresponding dozenal metric system would be very convenient, if you ignore the enormous cost of switching.

          • Solemn@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            Also, on the practical level, I have a specific mark to go to for 1/4". 1/4cm involves me guestimating the middle between two mm marks and just deciding that that’s middle enough. Small errors like this can actually add up really fast in something like woodworking

      • Fonzie!@ttrpg.network
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Okay, so why inches divided into 8ths?

        And why are there 16 cups in a gallon, 15-and-some tablespoons in a cup and 3 teaspoons in a tablespoon?
        Better make it 12 tablespoons in a cup and 12 cups in a gallon, then!

        And why are there 14 pounds in a stone and 16 ounce in a pound?

        The imperial system does not use dozenal.
        It uses a clusterfuck of bases because it’s actually a clusterfuck of measuring systems in a really big trenchcoat