Apologies for not responding on this. I felt this was furthering my point on the path dependence of our "scientific notation" being based on a base 10 system.

Apologies for not responding on this. I felt this was furthering my point on the path dependence of our "scientific notation" being based on a base 10 system. Were you intending this differently? I am curious what the "4 bits" you are referencing? Seems a small number of bits, even for the time. (This is not to be confused with the 4 bit per digit of BCD, which adds up per digit encoded such that you get a lot of waste rather rapidly. Or, do I have that wrong, as well?)