3 ms·

"it is the most divisional number under 100" implies there's some committee of Hammurabi where "they" evaluated all the possibilities and decided "60 is the bes

by cduzz 3y ago

"it is the most divisional number under 100" implies there's some committee of Hammurabi where "they" evaluated all the possibilities and decided "60 is the best". My understanding is that it's "finger bones between knuckles reachable by thumb" and "count of times counted through all knuckles". Meaning you count to 12 with one hand (thumb incrementing through finger bones) and then count 13-60 by incrementing the other. It just so happens that 12 * 5 ends up having a fantastic number of divisors.

foota 3y ago
If you're deriving a number by repeatedly adding (e.g., 5 12 times), you should be bound to have a greater than average number of divisors. So in some ways it's not entirely coincidental. In fact, 12 is derived the same way, 4 fingers times 3 knuckles, so the only coincidence is that 4 is divisible by 2.
- cduzz 3y ago
  I'm saying that the base 60 Babylonian system is derived from how many fingers people have on each hand and how many segments per finger, not because it's a fantastic base because it's got lots of whole divisors. If people were Disney cartoon characters (3 fingers + thumb) they'd likely have used base 36 (9 segments, 4 total digits on other hand). And yes -- by having a mixed system like this you'll end up with more divisors than if you only count digits.
  - foota 3y ago
    Yes, I agree. I'm saying it's not a coincidence that 60 has many divisors, but rather an artifact of the way it was derived. I don't think we disagree.
lolinder 3y ago
> "it is the most divisional number under 100" implies there's some committee of Hammurabi where "they" evaluated all the possibilities and decided "60 is the best". OP didn't say or imply anything about the origins of the Sumerians' use of base 60, they just observed that it has nice properties.

3 ms·

"it is the most divisional number under 100" implies there's some committee of Hammurabi where "they" evaluated all the possibilities and decided "60 is the bes

by cduzz 3y ago

foota 3y ago
If you're deriving a number by repeatedly adding (e.g., 5 12 times), you should be bound to have a greater than average number of divisors. So in some ways it's not entirely coincidental. In fact, 12 is derived the same way, 4 fingers times 3 knuckles, so the only coincidence is that 4 is divisible by 2.
- cduzz 3y ago
  I'm saying that the base 60 Babylonian system is derived from how many fingers people have on each hand and how many segments per finger, not because it's a fantastic base because it's got lots of whole divisors. If people were Disney cartoon characters (3 fingers + thumb) they'd likely have used base 36 (9 segments, 4 total digits on other hand). And yes -- by having a mixed system like this you'll end up with more divisors than if you only count digits.
  - foota 3y ago
    Yes, I agree. I'm saying it's not a coincidence that 60 has many divisors, but rather an artifact of the way it was derived. I don't think we disagree.
lolinder 3y ago
> "it is the most divisional number under 100" implies there's some committee of Hammurabi where "they" evaluated all the possibilities and decided "60 is the best". OP didn't say or imply anything about the origins of the Sumerians' use of base 60, they just observed that it has nice properties.