Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: OT: coins and currency (was: [Theory] Types of numerals)

From:Jefferson Wilson <jeffwilson63@...>
Date:Saturday, January 7, 2006, 3:07
Paul Bennett wrote:
> On Fri, 06 Jan 2006 08:11:15 -0500, Mark J. Reed <markjreed@...> > wrote: > >> In US currency, for instance, there are essentially 4 sub-dollar >> denominations (1, 5, 10, 25), since half dolalrs are very rare. As a >> result, some values require up to 9 coins (e.g. 94¢ and 99¢). >> Reintroduction of a commonly-circulated half-dollar would cut that >> down by one coin; a two-cent piece would reduce it by two more. That >> would yield six denominations and a maximum minimum (:)) of six coins >> per value. > > > I'm sure you're aware of the British system, which is partitioned 1, 2, > 5, 10, 20, 50, 100, 200, 500, etc. I have a gut feeling that it's more > optimal than the US system of (essentially) 1, 5, 10, 25, 100, 500, > 1000, 2000, which strikes me as more organic but less wieldy. > > Of course, it shouldn't take much math to prove that the most optimal > system would have units of 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, etc., provided of course > that the general populace could be made sufficiently familiar with the > concept.
Depends on whether you want the lowest number of _coins_ or the lowest number of _types_. Binary is good for the former, but for the latter you get the series: 1, 3, 6, 12, 24, etc. (Something to keep in mind for those of us with duodecimal numbering systems I think.) Hmmm, take this series up to 96, round each value to the nearest number divisible by 5, and you have the American coinage system. -- Jefferson http://www.picotech.net/~

Replies

Paul Bennett <paul-bennett@...>
tomhchappell <tomhchappell@...>