I'm one of the people who are intrigued by systems of measurement that use the number 10, not the number 12.

Already, nearly all nations measure distance in units based on the number 10, but all nations measure time, geometric figures, etc. in numbers based on 12 or on another obscure number.

For example, a day is 12+12 hours long instead of 10+10 hours long.
A week is 7 days long instead of 10.
A circle is divided into 360 units (12 multiplied) instead of 100 or 1000 units (10 multiplied).

Also, several areas still use non-metric units of measurement. For example, airliners measure altitude in feet, and boats measure speed in knots.

France, a long time ago, introduced a new calendar which had weeks last 10 days and made other changes to make calculation much easier. However, it never caught on and was given up. And I've seen Norwegian road signs that measure the steep-ness of hills in % values instead of in degrees (I assume 100%=a 90 degrees angle, ie. straight down), but that's about the extent of it. Except some people like to split a second into 50 instead of 60, for video recordings, etc.

How long do you think it will take before a more convenient system is thought up, if it'll ever happen?

The primary reason it should happen is obvious. For example, let's say someone spends 392 seconds on a race and you need to find the amount of minutes he used. As it is, you'll have to calculate using the number 60 to find the sum of 6,6 minutes. However, if we were using a system that made use of a minute divided by hundreds or tenths, it'd be easier, right?

For example, one minute=100 "new-seconds". The race was finished in 540 "new-seconds", which equal 5,4 minutes. Much easier to calculate, right?

The origins of lots of these systems are shrouded in mystery... but non-metric systems aren't actually that much harder to use, once you are familiar with them.

The origin of the Sumerian/Babylonian sexagesimal system of counting has not yet been truely explained. However, most historians concur in that the decimal system was in use at the same time. Some exegetists conclude that the use of the decimal system could not serve to analyse circle geometry as related to astronomical observations.

I cannot comment on man's stupidity but it is apparent we haven't progressed much, since modern societies continue in using both systems...

From answers provided by the Reader's Digest:

The 24-hour day. The Egyptian stargazers noted that the night was marked off by the consecutive rising of 12 bright stars. Bent on symmetry, they divided the day to match.
It was the Egyptian Pharaoh Amenophis who asked his chief engineer to build a water clock to enable measuring time at nights. Primitive sundials gave the approximate time during daylight. Greeks and Romans later on developed the clepsydras as water clocks that were able to measure fractions of hours.

12 inches to a foot. The foot, as its name suggests, was once the distance from the heel to tip of the big toe. Ancient Egyptians standardized it as two thirds of a short cubit. The cubit, the measure used by Noah to build his ark, was originally the length from elbow to middle fingertip, about 18 inches. Ancient Egyptians divided it into fingers and palms. Four finger widths or digits, made a palm, and six palms nade a cubit. Later, about 4,000 years ago, they added a seventh palm, naming it the royal cubit, which became standardized at approximately 21 inches.

Originally the inch represented the width of a man's thumb, but it was standardized in clasic Rome as one-twelfth of a foot. In 1305 Edward I of England defined the yard as made of three 12-inch feet and decreed that the inch should be equal to three grains of dry barley laid end to end. Shoemakers still use the barleycorn unit of measurement.

So it seems that most measurements started based on astronomical and physiological measurements (things people could see, not abstract notions).... which all seemed to be related in 1/3rd or 12ths. Maybe 12 is god's number or something? And i guess the 7 day week thing came from the bible.

Many measurements were only changed to decimal with the arrival of computers... but I guess the western calendar/time system had become too well established to change.
Also, calendars and time don't tend to cause as many headaches to people or computers as mathematics, so there really was no need to change them to an easier system.

Side note: Minor fact - though most western language is based mostly on the roman system, our numbering system comes from india and muslim countries. Partly because maths with roman numerals is impossible, and partly because they were the first to come up with some great ideas... like the concept of zero.

refs: http://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=117297&page=1)

According to Scandinavian Science Illustrated, the 12-system is used in part or fully because a mathematician a long time ago figured (for some odd reason) that 12 was a "perfect number" that was really, really easy to calculate with. Well, it is, but 10 is even easier, so you have to wonder why he didn't choose that one.

I still buy the sources you stated, though.

[Afghanistan rant]

Well, that says more about the media landscape in the US than about Afghanistan.

Already, nearly all nations measure distance in units based on the number 10, but all nations measure time, geometric figures, etc. in numbers based on 12 or on another obscure number.

Usually base 12 or base 60

For example, a day is 12+12 hours long

I.e. 20 hours long in base 12.

A week is 7 days long instead of 10.

That's mythology, not math.

A circle is divided into 360 units (12 multiplied)

Actually it's base 60, not base 12. It originated in Babylon, where they used a base 60 system.

And I've seen Norwegian road signs that measure the steep-ness of hills in % values instead of in degrees

I was given to believe that they all did that?

(I assume 100%=a 90 degrees angle, ie. straight down)

The percentage is the vertical distance divided by the horisontal distance (or the distance along the road, I can't remember which but it doesn't matter much because roads rarely slope more than 10-15%), meaning that 100% would be either a 45 degree angle or a 90 deg angle.

How long do you think it will take before a more convenient system is thought up, if it'll ever happen?

It already exists. The metric system (or SI). Everything in the SI is base 10 (except for certain 'adopted' units such as electron-volt and light-year).

They only hitch is time (oh, and the fact that mass has eluded any consistent definition - but that's another story). Time is measured in base 60 and base 12. And there's not a lot we can do about it. As long as time is measured on Earth by humans there are certain spans of time that should have their own name: The day and the year. And with the current definition of the second (which you don't want to change: Then you'd have to change the majority of all physical constants. That would be a pain in the butt no end) they just don't fit into a base 10 system.

And i guess the 7 day week thing came from the bible.

Nope. It's older. You'll find the 7 day week in most European pagan cultures.

Many measurements were only changed to decimal with the arrival of computers...

No. Measurements were changed to base ten by the SI instituted by the French Revolutions and Napoleon - as was the convention that you move in the right side of the road.

As a matter of fact these two conventions were spread largely by Napoleon's war of conquest: The countries that were conquered by or allied to Napoleon were the first to adopt driving in the right side of the road and usin the SI. Most countries have since followed suit with only England lagging behind on the driving things and only England, the US and a few other countries still using Imperial units.

According to Scandinavian Science Illustrated, the 12-system is used in part or fully because a mathematician a long time ago figured (for some odd reason) that 12 was a "perfect number" that was really, really easy to calculate with. Well, it is, but 10 is even easier, so you have to wonder why he didn't choose that one.

Well, what he said was that 12 was the perfect base for a numerical system, because it is divisible by 2, 3, 4, and 6 rather than the 2 and 5 of 10. And it is true. Base 12 is a lot easier to calculate with. But we only have ten fingers, so most cultures use base 10.

- ST

I was given to believe that they all did that?
And you're probably right. But I don't drive, so I don't know:rolleyes: .

A very informative post, that, ShadowTemplar.

As for the year, it'd be hard to change as it describes the cycles of the seasons (365 days). If we were to say it'd be 1000 or 100 days, we'd have to re-define what a year is.

Decimal "internet time":

http://www.timeanddate.com/time/internettime.html)

A ten based time system is something I dread to think of. :\

It would be bazare.

The base 10 (decimal) system is clearly based on the count of fingers on our hands. Great news, huh? ;] *waving over to Mr. Templar*

[edit]

Oh, and Insane, I very often get in contact with "base 10 time". It's not uncommon in wage calculation or time management software, which I support and stuff.

Originally posted by toms
Decimal "internet time":

http://www.timeanddate.com/time/internettime.html)

Seems fairly redundant. If we were to adopt a wholly new definition of 'day' then it would be much easier to simply dispense with the hour and minute and measure everything in seconds.

The akward length of the day can't be done away with without either finding another planet or another definition of second (the latter being extremely impractical for reasons mentioned above).

Indeed, we have found another definition for a second:

The second is the duration of 9 192 631 770 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the caesium 133 atom.

http://www.bipm.fr/en/si/si_brochure/chapter2/2-1/second.html)
Teach that to the pre-school children:D. Miss: "Now, children, how long is a second"?
Little Alice (5): 9 192 631 770 durations of caesium 133, miss."
Miss: "Very good! Now, on to..."
:D

Well, that kinda is the definition of second that I referred to as the current definition. Meaning that another definition would be like something other than that definition... Kinda.

OK, I make no sense right now.

CU L8R

- ST

My time system:

1yr = 13months
1month = 4 weeks (except feb on leap years when it would be 29 days)
1week = 7 days
1day = 24hrs
1hr = 100min
1min = 100sec

hows that? the extra month could be called Smarch.

this way a month is the time it takes the moon (hence month, it is where it came from after all) to go round the earth. tides would be easier to work out.

Originally posted by jon_hill987
My time system:

1yr = 13months
1month = 4 weeks (except feb on leap years when it would be 29 days)
1week = 7 days
1day = 24hrs
1hr = 100min
1min = 100sec

hows that? the extra month could be called Smarch.

this way a month is the time it takes the moon (hence month, it is where it came from after all) to go round the earth. tides would be easier to work out.

Ah, but then, with the extra month, would there even be a leap year? We've only got a leap year because each year is 12 months and 1/4 day, so every four years we get an extra day. Plus the 12 month year is calculated by the earth orbiting the sun; the days in the months are based on the seasons and the sun and so forth, so it would seem odd to change that....

Please correct me if I'm wrong about any of this; I'm tired and going strictly from memory.

As for an easier system: I had enough trouble getting through math the first time around, and I've no interest in trying to learn a new system. I do agree, however, that it would be useful. I have always liked the idea of a ten day week. :D

It would place Mondays farther apart, too, which I have to like:p .

There would need to be some sort of leap year-like system if weeks were to be 10 days long, though, as we'd end up with 35,6 weeks if my arithmetics are correct.

Originally posted by jon_hill987
My time system:

1yr = 13months
1month = 4 weeks
1week = 7 days

If we maintain that the day is one revolution of the Earth around its own axis, and that the year is one revolution of the Earth around the Sun, then your year is short by 1.25 days (minus a little bit).

1day = 24hrs
1hr = 100min
1min = 100sec

If again we maintain that a day is one revolution of the Earth about its own axis, then your day is 153600 seconds (=1.78 days) too long. Unless you change the definition of second - which, as has been pointed out before, would result in a major revision insofar physical constants are concerned.

The problem of the year being too short can be solved with relative ease: Simply insert the missing day just after New Year and give it a seperate name. Any leap days (and leap seconds) could be added or substracted from this day.

But changing the definition of the second - as you'd need to do to get the day right - is a major endeavour. It would be much simpler to say that a day is simply 86400 s long and then measure everything in seconds. Then 12 noon would translate to 43200, 6 a.m. would be 21600, 6 p.m. would be 64800, etc. Of course, in practice, people would probably make arrangements on whole ks (such as setting your alarm clock to 21 ks ~ 10 min before 6 a.m.).

So a day would be 8.64 hours long?
(with 100 minutes in an hour and 100 seconds in a minute)

That might work.

but even trying to think in another time system is making my head hurt...

Making a minute 100 seconds does not necessarily lenghten the minute if the seconds are shortened.

I can imagine something like lenghtening the hour and shortening both the second and the minute, resulting in a divide-by-ten thing like:

1 day: 20 hours
1 hour: 100 minutes
1 minute: 100 seconds

But as was said, that'd require a lot of money and frustration.

Originally posted by Dagobahn Eagle
Making a minute 100 seconds does not necessarily lenghten the minute if the seconds are shortened.

Ah-ha. But then the numerical values of alot of physical constants such as \epsilon_0, G, h-bar, etc. would change. As would either the definition of metre or the speed of light.

You can't change seconds. Think what it would do to all electronics and computer systems that run based on seconds (or milli or micro seconds).

Odd that below seconds its done on a decimal system, but after seconds its a mix of base 60, base 24, base 7, base 30 (or 31, or 28 or 29), base 365 etc...

But then at centuries it goes back to decimal.... :confused:

Originally posted by ShadowTemplar
[B]If we maintain that the day is one revolution of the Earth around its own axis, and that the year is one revolution of the Earth around the Sun, then your year is short by 1.25 days (minus a little bit).


My mistake. the extra day that isn't in any month would work. or maybe smarch could have have 29 days every year and feb could every 4 years.

I did mean to change the lenght of a second so my day s not too long. I do see that this would cause problems but they could be overcome.

Originally posted by toms
Odd that below seconds its done on a decimal system, but after seconds its a mix of base 60, base 24, base 7, base 30 (or 31, or 28 or 29), base 365 etc...

But then at centuries it goes back to decimal.... :confused:

That can be explained with relative ease: The year will be formatted in whatever system currently in use because years don't come in 'packages' (seconds in minutes, etc.).

The reason why the format returns to base 10 when you go below 1 s is equally simple: Units of time that are less than one second could not be measured accurately until after the French Revolution, and hence have no historical names or definitions. Therefore - as by standard SI practice - fractions are created by attaching a prefix.