So to a person raised using base 9, 1/3 is 30%, where the concept of “percent” matches what you would think of as a ratio out of 81.
I already did the conversion for you.
In their base 9 world, .1 means 11.111…%
.2 means 22…222…%
.8 means 88.888…%
and 1.0 would make it 99.999…%
But we both know that 1.0 in base 9 is 100%, not 99.999…%
.3 in base 9 is 3 parts of 9 parts in base 10.
3/9 = .333…
Fuck man,
Now you’re trolling.
“Percent” refers to the count of (100_{10}). Other bases do not have percentage as such.
No, a person raised in base 9 knows that .3 is the base 9 equivalent of the base 10 33.333…% of a whole.
Fuck.
Ok.
In different bases, different numbers are whole numbers. I’m using the word “whole number” differently than it’s defined. I mean: it terminates.
3 is a whole number in base 9.
It is not a whole number in base 10.
They are both considered rational numbers in both bases.
It’s an EVEN number.
Why would a person raised using base 9 think of mathematical concepts using base 10? Why would they think of percents the same why you do? Why wouldn’t you think of percents the same way they do?
Your position now has the same problem it had at the very start: you keep putting base 10 into a privileged position, and you’re only doing that for one reason: it’s the base you’re used to using.
There is nothing privileged about base 10.
Flannel hit the nail on the head, he wrote:
“ There is nothing privileged about base 10.”
Why would a base 10 person claim that a base 9 person can evenly divide 1 by 3 and get .3???
YOU are the one that started talking about a base 9 person’s world. I am converting the numbers for you to show you what they are equivalent to in their world.
Our base 10 world’s 33.333…% is equivalent to their base 9 world’s .3. They are both 33.333…% of a whole.
There’s a version of you in some world far away, where people’s left hands has 4 fingers but their right hands have 5, and that version of you was raised using base 9.
And there’s a version of me on that planet, arguing with you that base 8 is just as valid as base 9. And you’re insisting to me, on this planet, that dividing into 4 is nonsensical, but dividing into 3 makes perfect sense, because it’s just 0.3! And I’m telling you, no dude, dividing into 4 makes perfect sense in base 8, in base 8 it’s 0.2.
But that version of you is using the base 9 version of percents and insisting that, no no no, it’s impossible to split 1 into 4.
I wonder how the base 9 version of you would get along with the base 10 one. I know the base 9 version of me would find what I’m saying to be quite agreeable, but your base 9 alter ego would not be able to understand how you could keep in insisting that 1/4 is valid, when it’s clearly an infinite decimal.
Strawman.
I never claimed base 10 to be privileged. He built that strawman so that he could attack it. It was never said to begin with!
In base 10:
1 finger is .1 of the total fingers
2 fingers is .2 of the total fingers
.
.
.
9 fingers is .9 of the total fingers
10 fingers is 1.0 of the total fingers.
There is not “10”, there is .9, and 1 more finger makes 1.0
“13”, “thirteen” and “one times ten and three times one” are equivalent expressions that represent one and the same NUMBER. Yes, as strange as it may sound to you, 13 is a number. An unlucky number but still a number.
And it seems like you’re confusing DIGITS and NUMBERS. 13 is not a digit. 9 is but there is no digit 9 in base 9. Still, there IS number (9_{10}) in base 9. It’s (10_9).
It isn’t that they can’t but that they don’t.
The word and idea of “percent” happens (for whatever reason) to specifically refer to base 10 - “1/100” - one out of one hundred base 10 - nothing else.
Teach base 8 to a few 100 million people on another planet and they can have their own language where “percent” means 1 out of 80. In the mean time —
Wrong. What you are writing and saying when you write 13 is 1 in the Tens decimal place, and 3 in the Ones decimal place. There is no “times” or multiplication, there is the number 3 in the Ones decimal position.
It’s not 3 times 1 added to 1 times 10. It is a 1 in the Tens, and a 3 in the Ones.
There is no such animal as the number “Thirteen.” That is a word to describe what I just described, the decimal 013.0
Neither (\frac{1}{3}) nor (0.3_9) is equal to (33.333\dotso %).
We’re still waiting for you to prove that.
In base 10, 1/3 means 1.0 of 3.0. Do the division and you end up stuck trying to finish it for the rest of your life. We’ll just say that you made it to .333… and then kicked the bucket, with a remainder that still needed to be divided by 3.
You can’t finish the division of 1 divided by 3. Impossible!
The percent thing is an entire red herring. For most of the conversation, things were represented in decimal form, or in fraction form. 1/3 or 0.333… Bringing in “percents” like it’s some sort of new, unused and unbiased format is… not correct.
The “percent” format is literally just the base 10 decimal format, times 100, with a % symbol smacked after it. It didn’t add anything new to the conversation that wasn’t already covered by decimal representation.
(13) is merely a shorthand for (1 \times 10^1 + 3 \times 10^0). So yes, there is multiplication (as well as addition.)
You’re confusing the symbol itself (the string of numerals) with what that symbol stands for.
What is a “10” ? There is no number 10, that is a 1 in the Tens and a 0 in the Ones. Just because you drop the decimal point and lose the 0’s doesn’t mean it’s not decimal form.