WI: The metric system was duodecimal?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sure, but that same reason was used to argue against the introduction of the OTL metric system, but we seem to have managed fine.

I was referring to numbering systems, not just metric systems. My point is that a 10 based metric system is very practical when you have ten based ciphers and numerals already deeply ingrained in place, as it was the case, though has other disadvantages relative to duodecimal, unless you want people to re-learn the numbering system as well (let's leave alone the numerals as words for now). Which will give you a more practical coherent system overall in the end, but is quite a huge change that requires a lot of effort and resources. I think that economically it would not be worth it, and you have a faily long and awkward interim period.
Another point is that while measurements were not universal standards, decimal numbering already was. Changing a bad standard is usually more difficult than creating a new one. They chose to create a new standard, and understandably based it on the most standard at hand.
 
This is brand new to me and I'm fascinated by this. Say this gets adopted by the French, how could this spread to the rest of Europe and, eventually, the world? Who would most likely resist?
 
This is brand new to me and I'm fascinated by this. Say this gets adopted by the French, how could this spread to the rest of Europe and, eventually, the world? Who would most likely resist?

Who wouldn't?

It's a more complicated shift than the OTL metric system.
 
True, but most Europeans and a lot of other peoples had already learnt it.

Well.

Most Europeans were illiterate and seemed to be using combinations of base 12, 20 and 10 for counting at the time, while accounting, weights, measures and lengths were pretty much universally in base 12.

The fairer way to look at it is that most European scientists, mathematicians and engineers had switched to a predominately base 10 system.

It's still true that these are the main force behind something like the metric system, but it's not impossible to think of the accountants, shopkeepers and merchants calling for everything to be rationalised to one standard, and then picking base 12 because that's what they use all the time.
 
Well.

Most Europeans were illiterate and seemed to be using combinations of base 12, 20 and 10 for counting at the time, while accounting, weights, measures and lengths were pretty much universally in base 12.

The fairer way to look at it is that most European scientists, mathematicians and engineers had switched to a predominately base 10 system.

It's still true that these are the main force behind something like the metric system, but it's not impossible to think of the accountants, shopkeepers and merchants calling for everything to be rationalised to one standard, and then picking base 12 because that's what they use all the time.

I doubt that many people used exclusively base 12. The standard numerals, in all European languages I know of and in many other ones, are essentially based on 10. This means that ten is the most basic standard, the one embedded in language. Counting is more complicated, but 10 is a very widespread base for counting with hands. You CAN use different methods and some cultures do so, but most Europeans would have to re-learn new methods. Third, written numbering, in all Eurasian cultures I know of, is essentially based on ten too, with the partial exception of Roman numerals. This means that ten, in Europe and in most parts of Asia, is the closest approximation to a general standard for literate and illiterate people alike. Now, measures did not follow this standard. In their irregularity, they had some vague trend toward base 12, but this was far from a general standard.
Base 10 was much more entrenched among literate people, true, but the decimal system was created and enforced by literate people for their use. Switch to duodecimal still seems more difficult to me. Of course, once it is enforced, and IF it sticks (what if it gets rejected like Revolutionary Calendar?) people will get used to it and it will work just fine. Much more initial effort for a slightly more practical end result.
 
As I said, you basically need the driving force to come from people who have a vested interest in everything being base 12- the merchants and accountants who are using it for most of their needs.

Fundamentally, even if the counting system was a base 10 one, most people didn't count just for countings sake, they counted things, and length, money, some parts of the weight system (where base 16 wasn't used instead) and time (where most people couldn't care less about seconds, and didn't usually bother with minutes beyond 5 minute divisions) used base 12.

It's still difficult, but it's not impossible, and certainly could be referred to as more logical from a certain point of view.
 
So the consensus is that the push for a duodecimal metric system has to come from the merchant and accounting sectors, right? Now my knowledge of la Révolution may be irrevocably tainted by Franco-Japanese anime of "Les Misérable" from my childhood, but I don't think those two groups had much of a say in any of the phases of the Revolution as far as I can tell. Anyone with more background int the time period care to enlighten :)D) the rest of us.
 
I doubt that many people used exclusively base 12. The standard numerals, in all European languages I know of and in many other ones, are essentially based on 10. This means that ten is the most basic standard, the one embedded in language. Counting is more complicated, but 10 is a very widespread base for counting with hands. You CAN use different methods and some cultures do so, but most Europeans would have to re-learn new methods. Third, written numbering, in all Eurasian cultures I know of, is essentially based on ten too, with the partial exception of Roman numerals. This means that ten, in Europe and in most parts of Asia, is the closest approximation to a general standard for literate and illiterate people alike. Now, measures did not follow this standard. In their irregularity, they had some vague trend toward base 12, but this was far from a general standard.
Base 10 was much more entrenched among literate people, true, but the decimal system was created and enforced by literate people for their use. Switch to duodecimal still seems more difficult to me. Of course, once it is enforced, and IF it sticks (what if it gets rejected like Revolutionary Calendar?) people will get used to it and it will work just fine. Much more initial effort for a slightly more practical end result.

Falecius is quite right. Almost all countries and cultures use base 10 system in their every day lives. It is only in the case of time measurement that base 12 is used to some extent. Adopting base 12 system requires very great initial effort with very slim chances of success. It will be very difficult to force the people to discard a long entrenched and time tested system for a very small advantage of introducing a new base divisible by 3 and 4.
 
As I said, you basically need the driving force to come from people who have a vested interest in everything being base 12- the merchants and accountants who are using it for most of their needs.

Fundamentally, even if the counting system was a base 10 one, most people didn't count just for countings sake, they counted things, and length, money, some parts of the weight system (where base 16 wasn't used instead) and time (where most people couldn't care less about seconds, and didn't usually bother with minutes beyond 5 minute divisions) used base 12.

It's still difficult, but it's not impossible, and certainly could be referred to as more logical from a certain point of view.

I never said it was impossible.
 
So the consensus is that the push for a duodecimal metric system has to come from the merchant and accounting sectors, right? Now my knowledge of la Révolution may be irrevocably tainted by Franco-Japanese anime of "Les Misérable" from my childhood, but I don't think those two groups had much of a say in any of the phases of the Revolution as far as I can tell. Anyone with more background int the time period care to enlighten :)D) the rest of us.

Merchants had quite of a say, but probably not as much as required. Though I'm a little bit skeptical about their deeply-felt need to standardize everything specifically on duodecimal, I guess they wanted a standard of some kind.
 
So i am late to this party, which happens a lot, but I want in. Sorry if this is uncouth.

The duodecimal system is base ten, is the thing. All bases are base ten, really; whatever the base is, you start building your tens on it.

12 has a lot of rational advantages that make it terribly appealing. 12 is a highly composite number, it is the smallest number with four divisors: 2, 3, 4, and 6, which makes it practical for whole number fractions. We can use these three most common fractions without having to employ fractional notations. The numbers 6, 4, and 3 are all whole numbers and become half, thirds, and quarters now.

And in terms of being difficult to count, the four fingers each have three components which allows for counting in this way:
ku-medium.png


Pretty great to be worked into an alternate history, particularly one with so early a POD as the late 1700s
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
AoooAGHHH!!!!!

Zombie Alert!!!

Prepare reindeer device.

Lock on Mark 1 Red Nose missile!

Launch!

Target negated.

Set Condition 3.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top