Left Hand of the Electron by Isaac Asimov

Author:Isaac Asimov [Asimov, Isaac]
Format: epub
Published: 2010-05-22T00:24:06.435000+00:00

HO THE P R O B L E M OF N U M B E R S AND L I N E S

theory. It is perfectly easy to understand the system for writing

and handling numbers in a 30-based system, but to try to do so

in actual manipulations on paper is a one-way ticket to the booby

hatch—at least if your mind is no nimbler than mine.

The gain in prime-concentration in passing to a 30-based system (and I won't even talk about a 210-based system or anything

higher) is simply not worth the tremendous loss in manipulability.

Let us therefore stick with the 6-based system, which is not only

more efEcient as a prime-concentrator than our ordinary 10-based

system is, but is actually easier to manipulate once you are used

to it.

Or we can put it another way. It is the 6-based system which is,

in this respect at least, of prime quality.*

* Let there be no groaning in the galleryl

l O E U C L I D S F I F T H

Some of my articles stir up more reader comment than others,

and one of the most effective in this respect was one I once wrote

in which I listed those who, in my opinion, were scientists of the

first magnitude and concluded by working up a personal list of

the ten greatest scientists of all time.

Naturally, I received letters arguing for the omission of one or

more of my ten best in favor of one or more others, and I still

get them, even now, seven and a half years after the article was

written.

Usually, I reply by explaining that estimates as to the ten greatest scientists (always excepting the case of Isaac Newton, concerning whom there can be no reasonable disagreement) are largely a

subjective matter and cannot really be argued out.

Recently, I received a letter from a reader who argued that

Archimedes, one of my ten, ought to be replaced by Euclid, who

was not one of my ten. I replied in my usual placating manner,

but then went on to say that Euclid was "merely a systematizer"

while Archimedes had made very important advances in physics

and mathematics.

But later my conscience grew active. I still adhered to my own

opinion of Archimedes taking pride of place over Euclid, but the

phrase "merely a systematizer" bothered me. There is nothing necessarily "mere" about being a systematizer.*

For three centuries before Euclid (who flourished about 300

B.C.) Greek geometers had labored at proving one geometric

theorem or another and a great many had been worked out.

What Euclid did was to make a system out of it all. He began

* Sometimes there is. In all my non-fiction writings I am "merely" a

systematizer. —Just in case you think I'm never modest.

n 8

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.