Base 10 logarithms are evil

The very first tables of logarithms were according to the natural base
e (essentially). Base 10 was only adopted because it is somewhat more
easy for calculation with the decimal system. Now that technology was
obliviated the need to use log table for calculating, there is no
further reason to use base 10 logarithms at all.

Yet, many fields of science continue to do so. Sometimes this creates
confusion, as in the fact that optical depths may be measured either
way, and it is not always specified which. There is no benefit to
thinking in base 10, conceptually, and there is the serious
disadvantages of always having to insert factors of log 10.

Using base 10 logs is another example (along with the metric system)
of ignorant decimal-philia.

Andrew Usher

Andrew Usher wrote:

The very first tables of logarithms were according to the natural base
e (essentially).
[snip crap]

Death by adjective.

--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz4.htm

"Andrew Usher" wrote in message
...
The very first tables of logarithms were according to the natural base
e (essentially). Base 10 was only adopted because it is somewhat more
easy for calculation with the decimal system. Now that technology was
obliviated the need to use log table for calculating, there is no
further reason to use base 10 logarithms at all.

Yet, many fields of science continue to do so. Sometimes this creates
confusion, as in the fact that optical depths may be measured either
way, and it is not always specified which. There is no benefit to
thinking in base 10, conceptually, and there is the serious
disadvantages of always having to insert factors of log 10.

Using base 10 logs is another example (along with the metric system)
of ignorant decimal-philia.


we all know log2 is the one true logarithm...

down with decimal, in the future all math will be done in hexadecimal, and
we will not teach school-children this crufty old-style arithmetic, but to
it all the natural way, with bitwise operations and shifts...

in these days, knowledge will be written on whiteboards in the form of
base-64 encoded data, and people will ask questions in the form of SQL
queries and provide their answers in the form of a table in the form of a
question...

or, whatever...

BGB / cr88192 wrote:

Using base 10 logs is another example (along with the metric system)
of ignorant decimal-philia.


we all know log2 is the one true logarithm...

down with decimal, in the future all math will be done in hexadecimal, and
we will not teach school-children this crufty old-style arithmetic, but to
it all the natural way, with bitwise operations and shifts...

OK, you're right. We need log2 in computing. 2 is the only base other
than e that should be allowed to survive.

Andrew Usher

"Andrew Usher" wrote in message
...
BGB / cr88192 wrote:

Using base 10 logs is another example (along with the metric system)
of ignorant decimal-philia.


we all know log2 is the one true logarithm...

down with decimal, in the future all math will be done in hexadecimal,
and
we will not teach school-children this crufty old-style arithmetic, but
to
it all the natural way, with bitwise operations and shifts...

OK, you're right. We need log2 in computing. 2 is the only base other
than e that should be allowed to survive.


actually, all this was more of a joke...

all bases have their uses, FWIW...


Andrew Usher

On Sat, 20 Feb 2010 15:51:18 -0800 (PST), Andrew Usher wrote:

BGB / cr88192 wrote:

Using base 10 logs is another example (along with the metric system)
of ignorant decimal-philia.


we all know log2 is the one true logarithm...

down with decimal, in the future all math will be done in hexadecimal, and
we will not teach school-children this crufty old-style arithmetic, but to
it all the natural way, with bitwise operations and shifts...

OK, you're right. We need log2 in computing. 2 is the only base other
than e that should be allowed to survive.

How magnanimous of you.

I seemed to have missed the memo. How did this become your
prerogative?

Matt wrote:

OK, you're right. We need log2 in computing. 2 is the only base other
than e that should be allowed to survive.

How magnanimous of you.

I seemed to have missed the memo. How did this become your
prerogative?

Well, why can't I have an opinion?

Andrew Usher

On Sun, 21 Feb 2010 13:30:31 -0800 (PST), Andrew Usher wrote:

Matt wrote:

OK, you're right. We need log2 in computing. 2 is the only base other
than e that should be allowed to survive.

How magnanimous of you.

I seemed to have missed the memo. How did this become your
prerogative?

Well, why can't I have an opinion?

Life and death decisions; deciding who gets to live; mandating what
others get to use.

Those seem like something beyond mere opinion to me.

If you decide that you want to use only ln and log2, that's up to you.
Deciding that no one else gets to use log10 because it should not "be
allowed to survive" ... "for anything" seems more than a bit much.

Andrew Usher wrote:
The very first tables of logarithms were according to the natural base
e (essentially). Base 10 was only adopted because it is somewhat more
easy for calculation with the decimal system. Now that technology was
obliviated the need to use log table for calculating, there is no
further reason to use base 10 logarithms at all.

Yet, many fields of science continue to do so. Sometimes this creates
confusion, as in the fact that optical depths may be measured either
way, and it is not always specified which. There is no benefit to
thinking in base 10, conceptually, and there is the serious
disadvantages of always having to insert factors of log 10.

Using base 10 logs is another example (along with the metric system)
of ignorant decimal-philia.

Andrew Usher

plonk

In article ,
Andrew Usher wrote:

Using base 10 logs is another example (along with the metric system)
of ignorant decimal-philia.

Can we explain Usher's obsessions by conjecturing that his mother used
to beat him with a metre rule?

-- Richard
--
Please remember to mention me / in tapes you leave behind.