this post was submitted on 01 Oct 2023
373 points (93.1% liked)

News

23310 readers
3612 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] logicbomb@lemmy.world 169 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

They give a bit more context in this video. (from 2017)

By the way, I got that link from an article in The Guardian, and I can't find anything in either of those two articles that really adds on top of what was known in 2017. It could just be hard for a layperson to understand, and so was oversimplified?

TLDW is that researchers have known for decades that this tablet showed the Babylonians knew the Pythagorean Theorem for 1000 years before Pythagoras was born. So, that part isn't new.

They seem to be saying that what's new is that they understand each line of this tablet describes a different right triangle, and that due to the Babylonians counting in base 60, they can describe many more right triangles for a unit length than we can in base 10.

They feel like this can have many uses in things like surveying, computing, and in understanding trigonometry.

My take is that this was a very interesting discovery, but that they probably felt pressure to figure out a way to describe it as useful in the modern world. But we've known about the useful parts of this discovery for forever. Our clocks are all base 60. And our computers are binary, not base 10, just to start with.

We overvalue trying to make every advance in knowledge immediately useful. Knowledge can be good for its own sake.

[–] Nougat@kbin.social 48 points 1 year ago (2 children)

"Having many more right triangles for a unit length" would have an incredible benefit in constructing enormous triangly things.

[–] ininewcrow@lemmy.ca 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Instead becoming more acute about triangly things... we were more obtuse and went base ten

[–] dalekcaan@lemm.ee 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Well yeah, who's got 60 fingers? I mean sure, there's Fingers Georg, but that guy's weird.

[–] jarfil@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

People used to count 12 knuckles times 5 fingers for a total base 60.

Using only 5+5 fingers is the dumbed down version.

[–] ininewcrow@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Wasn't it the Sumerians that did use base 60 and just went to counting knuckles and joints to get to the base 60 system ... never fully understood it when I read about it either

Here is a demonstration

https://mathsciencehistory.com/2021/11/09/count-to-60-with-your-phalanges/

[–] jarfil@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

Sumerians and Babylonians used the same cuneiform writing system with a base of 6×10, but it seems like they also used to count to 60 as 12×5... and what we're left with, is the simplified 5+5=10.

Also, we shall remember that:

𒀭 𒐏𒋰𒁀 𒎏𒀀𒉌 𒂄𒄀 𒍑𒆗𒂵 𒈗 𒋀𒀊𒆠𒈠 𒈗𒆠𒂗 𒄀𒆠𒌵𒆤 𒂍𒀀𒉌 𒈬𒈾𒆕

[–] 8BitRoadTrip@lemm.ee 9 points 1 year ago

Now I’m wondering why the Babylonians didn’t have giant triangle shaped orbital habitats.

[–] squiblet@kbin.social 15 points 1 year ago (2 children)
[–] Zerlyna@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

They can math.

[–] queermunist@lemmy.ml -1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Base 12 is a good compromise between math and meat imo

[–] MagicShel@programming.dev 3 points 1 year ago

One, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, to market, stayed home.

[–] DarkDarkHouse@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Some days I wonder what would be different if we’d evolved with six fingers on each hand.

[–] jarfil@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

We've evolved with 14 knuckles on each hand... and a brain that struggles to keep 7 elements at once in operating memory. You can also count up to 1023 with just 10 fingers (in binary). It's not a lack of fingers problem.

[–] DarkDarkHouse@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm not sure what problem you're referring to. I mean if we naturally leant towards base 12, I wonder what would be different, if anything?

[–] jarfil@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The problem is our brains have a limited operating memory. People can (unless disabled) easily track 1 o 2 items at once, even 3, 4, 5... and start losing track somewhere around 6 or 7; 8 is considered exceptional.

That's why kids don't generally use their fingers to count 2+2, but start using them for "harder" operations like 4+4.

Base 10 is already past our brain's limits... but we're kind of fine with it because we can use our fingers (think of it as evolving at a time before formal education when most people were illiterate).

Base 60 is also past our brain's limits, but it's easily divisible into easy to track 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, or 6 pieces (aka $lcm(1..6)$), which makes it highly useful. The Babylonians still used to write it down as base 6×10, and it was common to count on knuckles and fingers as 12×5.

The uneducated populace picked up the easiest part of the two: 5+5.

if we naturally leant towards base 12

If we had 12 fingers, we could've as easily ended up using base 12, only thing different would be 1/3 would equal exactly 0.4, while 1/5 would equal 0.24972497... oh well, we'd manage.

If our brains could track 12 items at once however, then we could benefit from base $lcm(1..12)$ or 27720. That... is hard to imagine, because we can't track 11 items at once; otherwise 27720 would jump out as "obviously" divisible by 11, 9, or 7.

[–] Black_Gulaman@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 1 year ago

That's very interesting. Thank you for giving us your insight on this.