Regarding
the previous list which I recently posted, the answer is that the list was
prime numbers up to 42,875 listed in base 35. 42,875 is 35 cubed and in base 35 is of course 1000.The logic behind base 35, is, as you might gather by looking at the table, to write numbers using
all numbers and all letters of the English alphabet except O. The reason for not using O is, of course, that it is so similar to zero and that casually zero is often read as “O”. In fact, when I was a child, I was often told that “O is a letter, and zero [0] is the number” whenever I read the number as “O”, but would reply that “O is a number”.
The properties of this system of all numbers and all letters except O, scientifically called “
pentatrigesimal” are both familiar and unfamiliar compared to decimal.Like ten, 35 is a
deficient semiprime (=5x7). However, 35 is a much more deficient number than ten, having a deficiency of 22 (or 63 percent) as against 2 for the number 10. Thus, the proportion of fractions that terminate in pentatrigesimal is much smaller than in decimal: only denominators whose only prime factors are 5 and 7 terminate, and there are only 38 such numbers smaller than 1,500,625 (35
4, or 10000 in pentatrigesimal):
| Decimal | Pentatrigesimal | Prime factorisation |
| 5 | 5 | 5 |
| 7 | 7 | 7 |
| 25 | Q | 5*5 |
| 35 | 10 | 5*7 |
| 49 | 1E | 7*7 |
| 125 | 3K | 5*5*5 |
| 175 | 50 | 5*5*7 |
| 245 | 70 | 5*7*7 |
| 343 | 9T | 7*7*7 |
| 625 | HV | 5*5*5*5 |
| 875 | Q0 | 5*5*5*7 |
| 1,225 | 100 | 5*5*7*7 |
| 1,715 | 1E0 | 5*7*7*7 |
| 2,401 | 1YL | 7*7*7*7 |
| 3,125 | 2JA | 5*5*5*5*5 |
| 4,375 | 3K0 | 5*5*5*5*7 |
| 6,125 | 500 | 5*5*5*7*7 |
| 8,575 | 700 | 5*5*7*7*7 |
| 12,005 | 9T0 | 5*7*7*7*7 |
| 15,625 | CRF | 5*5*5*5*5*5 |
| 16,807 | DQ7 | 7*7*7*7*7 |
| 21,875 | HV0 | 5*5*5*5*5*7 |
| 30,625 | Q00 | 5*5*5*5*7*7 |
| 42,875 | 1000 | 5*5*5*7*7*7 |
| 60,025 | 1E00 | 5*5*7*7*7*7 |
| 78,125 | 1TS5 | 5*5*5*5*5*5*5 |
| 84,035 | 1YL0 | 5*7*7*7*7*7 |
| 109,375 | 2JA0 | 5*5*5*5*5*5*7 |
| 117,649 | 2R1E | 7*7*7*7*7*7 |
| 153,125 | 3K00 | 5*5*5*5*5*7*7 |
| 214,375 | 5000 | 5*5*5*5*7*7*7 |
| 300,125 | 7000 | 5*5*5*7*7*7*7 |
| 390,625 | 93VQ | 5*5*5*5*5*5*5*5 |
| 420,175 | 9T00 | 5*5*7*7*7*7*7 |
| 546,875 | CRF0 | 5*5*5*5*5*5*5*7 |
| 588,245 | DQ70 | 5*7*7*7*7*7*7 |
| 765,625 | HV00 | 5*5*5*5*5*5*7*7 |
| 823,543 | J79T | 7*7*7*7*7*7*7 |
| 1,071,875 | Q000 | 5*5*5*5*5*7*7*7 |
| 1,500,625 | 10000 | 5*5*5*5*7*7*7*7 |
As for
primes with short recurring periods, there are 37 primes with pentatrigesimal periods of 20 or shorter, vis-à-vis 32 in decimal. One of these is as long as twenty decimal digits, another eighteen, and another sixteen, so I will not replicate all numbers with pentatrigesimal periods of 20 or shorter here. There are twenty primes with pentatrigesimal periods of 12 or shorter, vis-à-vis sixteen in decimal:
| Pentatrigesimal | Pentatrigesimal repetend | Period | Decimal |
| 2 | 0.Ḣ | 1 | 2 |
| H | 0.2̇ | 17 |
| 3 | 0.ḂṄ | 2 | 3 |
| D | 0.2̇P8̇ | 3 | 13 |
| 2S | 0.0̇CṀ | 97 |
| HI | 0.0̇1ZẎ | 4 | 613 |
| W | 0.1̇4I29̇ | 5 | 31 |
| 15NR | 0.0̇00V4̇ | 49,831 |
| BC | 0.0̇32ZWẊ | 6 | 397 |
| 18 | 0.0̇TH38YḊ | 7 | 43 |
| UBENM | 0.0̇00016Ṡ | 44,007,727 |
| HHHI | 0.0̇001ZZZẎ | 8 | 750,313 |
| J | 0.1̇UGK97CWḂ | 9 | 19 |
| 1UGM3P | 0.0̇0000IZZĠ | 96,753,079 |
| B | 0.3̇6CQFWTM9J̇ | 10 | 11 |
| 339G | 0.0̇00BAZZZNṖ | 132,631 |
| N | 0.1̇I94JSDPC63̇ | 11 | 23 |
| 1AM8 | 0.0̇00RUI4JFCḊ | 55,903 |
| 171RAE4 | 0.0̇00000U4LMṘ | 2,208,546,869 |
| 7X | 0.0̇4ESEMZVK7KĊ | 12 | 277 |
| 4EN | 0.0̇07X7WZZS2S3̇ | 5,413 |
Pentatrigesimal fractions for the first sixty natural numbers (periods listed in decimal notation) are:
| | Pentatrigesimal reciprocal | Period | Decimal |
| 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| 2 | 0.Ḣ | 1 | 2 |
| 3 | 0.ḂṄ | 2 | 3 |
| 4 | 0.8̇Ṙ | 2 | 4 |
| 5 | 0.7 | 0 | 5 |
| 6 | 0.5̇U̇ | 2 | 6 |
| 7 | 0.5 | 0 | 7 |
| 8 | 0.4̇Ḋ | 2 | 8 |
| 9 | 0.3̇Ẇ | 2 | 9 |
| A | 0.3Ḣ | 1 | 10 |
| B | 0.3̇6CQFWTM9J̇ | 10 | 11 |
| C | 0.2̇Ẋ | 2 | 12 |
| D | 0.2̇P8̇ | 3 | 13 |
| E | 0.2Ḣ | 1 | 14 |
| F | 0.2ḂṄ | 2 | 15 |
| G | 0.2̇6JṖ | 4 | 16 |
| H | 0.2̇ | 1 | 17 |
| I | 0.1̇Ẏ | 2 | 18 |
| J | 0.1̇UGK97CWḂ | 9 | 19 |
| K | 0.1Ṙ8̇ | 2 | 20 |
| L | 0.1ṄḂ | 2 | 21 |
| M | 0.1̇KNV7YEB4Ṡ | 10 | 22 |
| N | 0.1̇I94JSDPC63̇ | 11 | 23 |
| P | 0.1̇Ġ | 2 | 24 |
| Q | 0.1E | 0 | 25 |
| R | 0.1̇C4̇ | 3 | 26 |
| S | 0.1̇ACYPṀ | 6 | 27 |
| T | 0.18̇Ṙ | 2 | 28 |
| U | 0.1̇78FP4TYSRJAV6̇ | 14 | 29 |
| V | 0.15̇U̇ | 2 | 30 |
| W | 0.1̇4I29̇ | 5 | 31 |
| X | 0.1̇39UIKSĊ | 8 | 32 |
| Y | 0.1̇248GYXVRİ | 10 | 33 |
| Z | 0.1̇ | 1 | 34 |
| 10 | 0.1 | 0 | 35 |
| 11 | 0.0̇Ż | 2 | 36 |
| 12 | 0.0̇Y3SF4QIX5NMPKTD8HZ1W7JV9G2UBCAE6LRḢ | 36 | 37 |
| 13 | 0.0̇X8A4L6FṄ | 9 | 38 |
| 14 | 0.0̇WECJṘ | 6 | 39 |
| 15 | 0.0V̇L̇ | 2 | 40 |
| 16 | 0.0̇UVQLBYA8ISB3EHXFCT5Z549DN1PRG7NWKH2JM6U̇ | 40 | 41 |
| 17 | 0.0U̇5̇ | 2 | 42 |
| 18 | 0.0̇TH38YḊ | 7 | 43 |
| 19 | 0.0̇SUF3Z75JẆ | 10 | 44 |
| 1A | 0.0Ṡ7̇ | 2 | 45 |
| 1B | 0.0̇RM29W6UNKJ̇ | 11 | 46 |
| 1C | 0.0̇R286PK3QB5YHVILKUSJCN2Z8XRTAEW9NU1H4GDE57FMBẊ | 46 | 47 |
| 1D | 0.0̇QI8̇ | 4 | 48 |
| 1E | 0.0Q | 0 | 49 |
| 1F | 0.0PḢ | 1 | 50 |
| 1G | 0.0̇Ṗ | 2 | 51 |
| 1H | 0.0̇NJI62̇ | 6 | 52 |
| 1I | 0.0̇N3YNS2MFUQ3AJTDVD798KGHU1ZBW1B7XCJ59WPF6L4LSQREIH5Ẏ | 52 | 53 |
| 1J | 0.0̇MNZCḂ | 6 | 54 |
| 1K | 0.0Ṁ9J36CQFWṪ | 10 | 55 |
| 1L | 0.0L̇V̇ | 2 | 56 |
| 1M | 0.0̇LH6RE4AFC9TV32FYṠ | 18 | 57 |
| 1N | 0.0̇L47UJWZDVS5Ḟ | 14 | 58 |
| 1P | 0.0̇KRPB9H745BV8WFEU2D1SA2YTGLCĠ | 29 | 59 |
| 1Q | 0.0K̇Ė | 2 | 60 |
As you can see, the periods are different from those in decimal, apart from powers of five, the full period prime 47 (and 61 if I extended the list), the number 52, and the odd semiprimes 39 and 57. Noteworthy is the large number of denominators with pentatrigesimal period 2: nineteen numbers out of sixty, vis-à-vis only five in decimal.
2 comments:
I think that not skip the letter O, base 36 is better, by your logic O and 0 are confused, why not I and 1? Or S and 5?
See these pages:
http://www.tonymarston.net/php-mysql/converter.html, https://www.dcode.fr/base-36-cipher, http://www.urticator.net/essay/5/567.html, http://www.urticator.net/essay/6/624.html, https://docs.python.org/3/library/functions.html#int, https://numpy.org/doc/stable/reference/generated/numpy.base_repr.html, https://reference.wolfram.com/language/ref/BaseForm.html, https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/office/base-function-2ef61411-aee9-4f29-a811-1c42456c6342, https://www.cut-the-knot.org/recurrence/word_primes.shtml, https://oeis.org/A072922, https://oeis.org/A073421, https://oeis.org/A002488 (the Alonso del Arte comment in Jul 01 2012), https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Base36, https://web.archive.org/web/20150320103231/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Base_36, https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syst%C3%A8me_%C3%A0_base_36 (in French), https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E4%B8%89%E5%8D%81%E5%85%AD%E9%80%B2%E6%B3%95 (in Japanese), https://baseconvert.com/, https://baseconvert.com/high-precision, https://www.calculand.com/unit-converter/zahlen.php?og=Base+2-36&ug=1, http://www.unitconversion.org/unit_converter/numbers.html, http://www.unitconversion.org/unit_converter/numbers-ex.html, http://www.kwuntung.net/hkunit/base/base.php (in Chinese), https://linesegment.web.fc2.com/application/math/numbers/RadixConversion.html (in Japanese)
I can see your point, but I think it is much easier to confuse O and 0 than they other two. At all events, as a child I would read "0" as "oh", but never the same with "1" and "I" (except when reading Roman numerals in my old World Cars 1984 and World Cars 1985 books.
Post a Comment