Imagine using numbers in a world where most people have no real understanding of fractions.
That is also the reason why you see the same or similar numbers as common screen refresh rates. 24, 48, 60, 120 and 240.
The 12 hour clockface design is that way because it is a similar design to that of a sundial, so people did not need to learn a new way to read the time. This also meant that for readibility reasons it was beneficial to only have 12 numbers.
Everybody loves composite numbers, but I’m missing the point in which this is advantage in the context of time.
The only situation I know of where time needs to be divided is in paid work, and in this case it’s always converted to base 10 money.
The numbers on the clock actually make a lot of sense.
12, 24 and 60 are highly composite numbers (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highly_composite_number).
Imagine using numbers in a world where most people have no real understanding of fractions.
That is also the reason why you see the same or similar numbers as common screen refresh rates. 24, 48, 60, 120 and 240.
The 12 hour clockface design is that way because it is a similar design to that of a sundial, so people did not need to learn a new way to read the time. This also meant that for readibility reasons it was beneficial to only have 12 numbers.
60 in particular is a superior highly composite number, 12 divisors compared to a paltry 8 for 24.
Surely you mean common refresh rates like 23.976Hz (NTSC), 25hz (PAL & ATSC), 50hz (PAL & ATSC), 59.95hz (NTSC), 100hz (PAL+) and 144hz, right? /s
Everybody loves composite numbers, but I’m missing the point in which this is advantage in the context of time. The only situation I know of where time needs to be divided is in paid work, and in this case it’s always converted to base 10 money.
Fixed url https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highly_composite_number