21–30 of 343 posts
> Working with base-10 numbers is so much easier than trying to think in base-60, base-12, and base-24. > To get a good night sleep (8 standard hours) you'd sleep for 3.33 metric hours. Quote 2 seems to clearly contradict quote 1. 60 is great as it divides into 2,3,4 and 5. That's a feature not a bug
>> Working with base-10 numbers is so much easier
I mean, every base is base 10.
I'd rather start redoing the calendar. It doesn't need to be metric but the different lengths of the months (and the naming Oct. should be 8 not 10?) could be reworked.
In some ways, sure. If you're doing precise mathematical things. Otherwise, if you're doing simple mental math, base-12, -24, and -60 have some advantages.
60 can be evenly divided into 1/2 (halves) or 30 min, 1/3 (thirds) or 20 min, /4 or 15 min, /5 or 12 min, /6 or 10 min, and by 12, 15, 20, 30, and 60.
24 can be divided by 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, and so on for 12. I always assumed this was the reason for the "imperial" unit measures and for time and length. Dividing things into thirds is a common use-case and it's nice to be able to do that evenly.
This site says "Metric Time", but I think they mean "Decimal Time" ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decimal_time ). There is a https://www.decimal-time.com/ site that has working Decimal Time clocks. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metric_time
Another similar thought experiment is binary clocks which I remember using to get use to read in base 2. [1]
Weekly clocks are also a good way to change perspective on time. [2]
Both are fun to use, especially with other people if you manage to get them to experiment with you. Both have the avantage of avoiding any confusion with SI time.
[1]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binary_clock [2]: https://dayclocks.com/products/classic-oak
Does this short page describing a base-10 way of dividing time actually fail to be internally consistent for the few sentences of text describing it? > A standard hour is broken into 60 minutes. There are 2.4 standard hours in 1 metric hour. > A metric minute is broken into 100 seconds. > A standard minute has 60 seconds. There are 2.4 standard minutes in 1 metric minute. No, a standard minute is 1/1440 of a day, and…
I’ve spent most of my life in countries where the metric system is used for distance, weight, temperature etc.
This year I’ve had to travel a lot to the US for work and found the constant mental conversions a PITA. I kept wondering why people keep holding out against such an obviously easier system.
Then I read this article about 8 hours of sleep would be 3.33 metric hours. How you wake up at 9:50 after sleeping at 2:75 and I notice real-time at the absolute recoil I feel reading this. Maybe I’m getting older , but I completely get how familiarity to numbers being represented a certain way is hard to let go of.
I'm really fascinated by such ideas. However, it's just academic as time is so much baked into physical devices (watches, clocks, ...) so this will most probably never happen. I'd rather start redoing the calendar. It doesn't need to be metric but the different lengths of the months (and the naming Oct. should be 8 not 10?) could be reworked.
This was a fascinating read for a totally unexpected reason. I’ve spent most of my life in countries where the metric system is used for distance, weight, temperature etc. This year I’ve had to travel a lot to the US for work and found the constant mental conversions a PITA. I kept wondering why people keep holding out against such an obviously easier system. Then I read this article about 8 hours of sleep would be 3…
> Working with base-10 numbers is so much easier than trying to think in base-60, base-12, and base-24. > To get a good night sleep (8 standard hours) you'd sleep for 3.33 metric hours. Quote 2 seems to clearly contradict quote 1. 60 is great as it divides into 2,3,4 and 5. That's a feature not a bug
And 12 divides into 2, 3, 4 and 6. Base 12 is far superior to base 10. Those Babylonians weren’t stupid.