• AItoothbrush@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    47
    ·
    7 天前

    I mean not really cause base one would just be 111 + 111 = 111111. On the other hand if its baseless it still doesnt work cause then its 3 + 6 = 9? But with that it could just be base 10. One thing that could work is that its actually a split base 4 and 8 system where the first 3 digits of a number are base 4 and the rest are base 8 but this is a very confusing system and the opposite of what is usual. It could also be a system where 1, 2, 3 are used for whole parts of numbers and 4, 5, 6 were added when they inveneted fractions so they represent the fractional part of numbers? Thats what im gonna put my money on tho im probably ignoring something obvious.

    • abbadon420@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      28
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 天前

      I disagree with you definition of base 1. Since base 10 is 0 through 9, and base 2 is 0 and 1, therefor base 1 must be only 0.

      The real question is: How do we continue?
      What is base 0?
      Is that equal to base 1?
      Are the negative bases?

      • AItoothbrush@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 天前

        This is completely true but i kinda shortcut to a zeroless base 1, basically a counting system. Another way you could make it work is of you had a seperate numeral for each factor of 2. So 1->1, 2->2, 3->4, 4->8, etc. So 123 is just 1+10+100->111 in base 2 so 123+456=123456 is true because 7+56 is 63. Idk i think we are overcomplicating a meme but thats what the internet is for and i think this system is actually not even that cursed.