Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

[deleted] t1_irk4h89 wrote

[deleted]

−5

D-Ulpius-Sutor t1_irk65tv wrote

Mathematically it actually does. If you want to divide a total into equal whole parts (so without using decimals) the number 10 actually isn't that good, since you can divide only by 10, 5 and 2. 12 on the other hand has five: 12, 6, 4, 3 and 2. The higher the multiples of 12 get, the more divisions fit in. With multiples of ten it actually doesn't get that much better.

So 12, 24, 48, 120, and 240 are way better totals for simple divisions for - let's say - packs of goods, time or money to be divided into equal parts that cannot or are easier not to be subdivided.

19

Johannes_P t1_irkbv9l wrote

It's a multiple of 2 and 3, and this's enough for me.

0

IncompetentFrog t1_irk4yxn wrote

24 hours is how long it takes for the earth to spin 1 time, it is also the amount of time our biological clocks are attuned to. It makes plenty of sense.

For example a 10 hour clock would never be consistent with daytime

−14

Smooman21 t1_irk5wgj wrote

Oh my sweet summer child... They're 10 units of time, not hours as you normally think. Each unit is longer than an hour and it fills the entire day/night cycle

24

MentallyMusing t1_irkf1cn wrote

These are reasonings handed out after the fact to instill compliance and understanding to be used in defense of keeping the 24hour world clock in place as a standard after Railroad Corporations instituted the practice so their employees and shipments were able to predictably be in the expected place and negotiations over who could use what rail line when could be legally enforceable and eventually recieve Exclusive Rights of Use. It's an interesting bit of contractual warfare and new technology being used to create systematic standards meant by their Creators to last am eternity with predictable effects on society

−1