this post was submitted on 19 May 2025
90 points (97.9% liked)
Asklemmy
48120 readers
707 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The most efficient base for a number system is e.
We use base 10 with 0-9 digits and each position is a ten's place, and the efficiency being measured is the product of the number of digits and the length of digits needed to represent a number in a given range of values. So if we used base 2 binary instead of base 10 decimal we only need to remember 2 digits 0-1, but to represent most numbers we'll need more digits, 11 in base 10 is 1011 in base 2. On the other side we could use hexadecimal to write shorter numbers like 11 is B, but need to use more digits, 0-F digits where A-F are the 10-15 digits.
If you try to plot a function that minimizes the efficiency the minimum is at e. So you'd have digits 0-2 and e would be written as 10 since each position is an e's place.
This is not a great explanation of radix economy of Base e.