From: Alan Riddell (pkpeekee_at_hotmail.com)
Date: Thu Feb 07 2002 - 09:01:52 PST
> > To be fair I dont see what the word twelve has any relevance with the >word > > one in this matter. Although, perhaps there is a confusion between names >of > > digits and names of numbers. Names of numbers change in a different >base, > > names of digits remain the same. One still refers to the digit 1 in base >11. > >Indeed names of digits do not change with base - that is because they >are not written in that (or any other!) base. "One" does still refer to >the digit 1 in base 11 - but you are not using base 11 when you refer >to the digit by its name... I am not so sure for numbers 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9 it is imposiible to tell if you are using them in a base 10 or higher. The same goes for "Zero", "One", "Two". Going back to your statement that you would "never refer to twelve in base 7 as "fifteen"" I agree as there is ambiguity. However, if I was working in base 7 and saw the number 65 I would read it out as "sixty-five" provided it was clear that I speaking in base 7. Of course if there was ambiguity I would have to make clear if I was reading it out in base ten or whatever. However this ambiguity does not exist for low numbers in high bases. What would you read 2,007,854 as in base 7? Another issue with 1 and 0. Even when working in groups or rings 0 is sometimes written as the additive identity and is refered to as "the zero" of the ring. Similarly for 1. Alan Riddell _________________________________________________________________ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com -- Rule Date: 2002-02-07 17:02:19 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Nov 24 2011 - 10:48 PST