All you say about the merits of the system may be true - but he was proposing it as a replacement for the base 10 system, for common, everyday use. That's what makes him a crackpot, along with all those who would rationalise spelling or force-feed us a new universal language built on logical principles.
What you say is very interesting, though, so thanks, though it'll take more than your comment to cure me of pontificating.
I am a mathematician.
Actually, there are advantages to having a prime as basis--because having divisors of the base actually complicates fractional arithmetic--as was mentioned by the great mathematician Lagrange.
Base three arithmetic with a special symbol for minus 1 as a digit is actually the optimal
arithmetic system, in terms of efficiency of computation--and this was recognized when computers were first invented--but, binary could be related to on and off switching
and to boolean algebra ( see Shannon's master's thesis).
Some new chips are now actually designed using this base three arithmetic with the minus one symbol. They are faster chips than the usual ones.
However, the book is bad--because the author and editor never did a literature search--the idea is CLASSICAL.
Never-the-less, it is not at all a crackpot idea. The longer numerical representations are a trouble, but the increased arithmetic efficiency makes it worthwhile.
Of course, today, with calculators--why bother learning this method? If you are designing high speed math coprocessor chips, it is essential.
So, in the end--it pays to consult a mathematician before pontificating on mathematics.
All you say about the merits of the system may be true - but he was proposing it as a replacement for the base 10 system, for common, everyday use. That's what makes him a crackpot, along with all those who would rationalise spelling or force-feed us a new universal language built on logical principles.
What you say is very interesting, though, so thanks, though it'll take more than your comment to cure me of pontificating.
Thank you for indirectly
All you say about the merits
All you say about the merits of the system may be true - but he was proposing it as a replacement for the base 10 system, for common, everyday use. That's what makes him a crackpot, along with all those who would rationalise spelling or force-feed us a new universal language built on logical principles.
What you say is very interesting, though, so thanks, though it'll take more than your comment to cure me of pontificating.
I am a
All you say about the merits
All you say about the merits of the system may be true - but he was proposing it as a replacement for the base 10 system, for common, everyday use. That's what makes him a crackpot, along with all those who would rationalise spelling or force-feed us a new universal language built on logical principles.
What you say is very interesting, though, so thanks, though it'll take more than your comment to cure me of pontificating.