this post was submitted on 24 May 2024
1185 points (97.6% liked)

Science Memes

11205 readers
4099 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 26 points 6 months ago (4 children)

Some people argue that it would be harder to count on your fingers but we could just surgically give everyone more?

[–] [email protected] 27 points 6 months ago (5 children)

There are 12 sections on your fingers (excluding your thumb) you then use your thumb to count to 12 on one hand.

Two hands can allow you to count to 24. Which is way higher than 10. Base 12 is better!

[–] [email protected] 19 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Binary’s the way. 1023 with 10 fingers

[–] [email protected] 8 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

I like the idea of some numbers being popular hand gestures.

4 - Fuck you; 17 - Shaka (hang loose); 18 - Metal horns; 19 - "I love you"; 132 - Double fuck you

[–] [email protected] 10 points 6 months ago (1 children)

With 2 hands you can count to 144.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago
  1. 12*12 on one hand + 12 on the other one
[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago

Bold of you to assume I'd ever remember this counting technique. Hell I'm shocked I remember counting my fingers for base 10..

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago

Use the other hand to count twelves! Each time you fill up one hand, add one to the other. That way you can get all the way to 156, which is probably more than you'd ever want to count one by one anyway

[–] [email protected] -1 points 6 months ago

To be fair, you should be comparing 2 hands in base 12 to 2 hands in base 10, I. E. 20:24. Still a real difference, but not the 10:24 difference you pointed out.

[–] Cethin 8 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

Binary is very good for counting with your fingers. With both hands you can count to 1023. One hand is 31, which is still usually more than you typically need to count. It's also trivial to do once you know how binary works. It takes very little thought, though potentially the decoding could take a bit depending on your proficiency.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 months ago (2 children)

I made it to 27 on my first attempt, so def messed up somewhere. Also, my fingers don't want to work that way.

Doable.

[–] Cethin 3 points 6 months ago

I agree it can feel weird, but first this isn't how we are used to doing it so it hard to compare, and also normally we want our fingers in very precise positions (probably because it's easier to show other people). When doing binary I feel it's easier to ignore precise positions. I just use the half of my finger after the middle knuckle and let my fingers move as they please. We only need to track up or down, so it doesn't need to be precise.

Practice helps. I'm not good at it, but I can manage it fine at this point. For sure it'd doable, but I rarely have to count, and when I do I can generally do it in my head fine. I could see myself using it maybe if tracking a large number over a long time, but I don't see that case ever coming up organically.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago

Also 4 might insult people, and some conservatives may take issues with 18.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 months ago (2 children)

When was the last time you've actually needed to count something on your fingers?

[–] [email protected] 18 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

✌🏻 days ago

Edit: 👌🏻 days ago

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

I find it useful if I'm counting only specific instances of something that meet some criteria. That way my brain can focus on picking out the right things and not have to worry about keeping the current count in mind. I use the method with your thumb on each segment of your fingers though, so you can get up to twelve with one hand and 156 with both

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Billions of years ago, our collective great-great-great-[several million more]-grandparent evolved a fin with a five bone structure. That idiot didn't know anything about common denominators, and now we're stuck with this numeric system that can't divide things into thirds without causing issues.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago

Vertebrates appeared less than a billion years ago.