quddusaliquddus
- 353
- 3
There have been strange number systems used in the past in different parts of the world ... do you know any? 
The discussion centers on the peculiarities of historical number systems, particularly highlighting the T'lingut people's base-4 and base-8 counting method, which contrasts with the more common base-10 system. Participants note the inefficiencies of Roman Numerals, which require extensive symbols for simple numbers, and compare them to the more efficient Hindu numeral system that forms the basis of modern decimal counting. The conversation also touches on the persistence of conventions in measurement systems, suggesting that cultural practices heavily influence numerical representation.
PREREQUISITESHistorians, mathematicians, educators, and anyone interested in the cultural aspects of numerical systems and their evolution over time.
I don't know about that. The Romans had an awkward number system, but most civilizations before, during, and after them I would assume, had decent number systems. The Hindu system of numbers upon which our current decimal system is based existed either before or during the time of the Romans. Also, I don't think number systems, except for the Romans (all I can think of) were baseless. The first number systems were a base 1 system -- tallying.Gokul43201 said:For a long time, number systems were "baseless". Look at Roman Numerals for instance - it takes cartloads of numerals to write a 4 or 5 digit (decimal) number.
Now isn't that strange ?
Conventions die hard. Consider the imperial system of measurements.quddusaliquddus said:Does any1 know y they decided to stik to their number?>