View previous topic :: View next topic |
Nick Weech
|
|
|
|
Hi guys, gals and others.
Tx to a nudge from Usselo and a push from our Blessed Leader I'm posting a query, in the expectation of receiving wisdom
What's this with counting in Scores= using 10s as opposed to counting in Dozens = using 6's right up to a Gross
6X6 doubled72 and redoubled 144. The only obvious thing to me is working 6 days and a day, adds up to roughly 1 year of 52 weeks.
Why count eggs in 6's? Always been a mystery for me. Whole Imperial units system rods, perches, bushels, pecks.
Milk's always came in pints (!) and eggs in 6's. Naturally enough.
Hands and feet, fingers + toes or my two hands and another's to count how many goats/pigs/chickens/cows or for bags of wheat/oats/barley... makes common sense to use 10/20/etc
They appear to be derivative words not from primitive Latin [apart from gross allegedly] ; ten, twelve, twenty, six,
e.g. one [Originally pronounced as it still is in only, atone, alone, and in dialectal good 'un, young 'un, etc.; the now-standard pronunciation "wun" began c. 14c. in southwest and west England (Tyndale, a Gloucester man, spells it won in his Bible translation), and it began to be general 18c.]
https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=one
I tried searching but just gave me a series of posts and nothing to pursue. I was tempted to give up there and then I admit.
[Maybe I should enrol for an online course here?]
I thought here MUST BE a thread hereabouts- so whether they were for counting different items or whether it was different 'cultures' or tribes that preferred option 10 or option 6 ... I'm open to your research.
How to sign off here?
with 'Felicitations'? = a primitive word: Like 'Regards'
[ c1620s, "to render happy" (obsolete); 1630s, "to reckon happy;" from Late Latin felicitatus, past participle of felicitare "to make happy," from Latin felicitas "fruitfulness, happiness," from felix "fruitful, fertile; lucky, happy" (see felicity). Meaning "congratulate, compliment upon a happy event" is from 1630s. Related: Felicitated; felicitating. Little-used alternative verb form felicify (1680s) yielded adjective felicific (1865).]
I prefer Cheers:
[late 14c., cheren, "to humour, console, dispel despondency;" c. 1400 as "entertain with food or drink," from cheer (n.).]
Looking forward to the next book launch !
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
What's this with counting in Scores= using 10s |
A score uses 20's not 10s.
as opposed to counting in Dozens = using 6's |
A dozen is twelve not two 6's
right up to a Gross 6X6 doubled 72 and redoubled 144. |
What is so special about 144?
The only obvious thing to me is working 6 days and a day, adds up to roughly 1 year of 52 weeks. |
Why divide the year into fifty-two? Why divide the ensuing compartments into 6 + 1?
Why count eggs in 6's? Always been a mystery for me. |
They are counted in dozens not 6's. But a fair point, why dozens?
Whole Imperial units system rods, perches, bushels, pecks. |
Could you more specific? What is their base number?
Milk's always came in pints (!) |
What else should it come in if you are using Imperial units?
and eggs in 6's. Naturally enough. |
Dozens, naturally enough.
Hands and feet, fingers + toes or my two hands and another's to count how many goats/pigs/chickens/cows or for bags of wheat/oats/barley... makes common sense to use 10/20/etc |
So you enquiring why the decimal system is eschewed by the Imperial system. A good question.
They appear to be derivative words not from primitive Latin [apart from gross allegedly] ; ten, twelve, twenty, six, e.g. one [Originally pronounced as it still is in only, atone, alone, and in dialectal good 'un, young 'un, etc.; the now-standard pronunciation "wun" began c. 14c. in southwest and west England (Tyndale, a Gloucester man, spells it won in his Bible translation), and it began to be general 18c.] https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=one |
OK
I tried searching but just gave me a series of posts and nothing to pursue. I was tempted to give up there and then I admit. [Maybe I should enrol for an online course here?] |
OK
I thought here MUST BE a thread hereabouts- so whether they were for counting different items or whether it was different 'cultures' or tribes that preferred option 10 or option 6 ... I'm open to your research. |
Well, you have given us a push. I cannot guarantee whether the current bunch of distracted savants are up to it, but we can only see.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Weech
|
|
|
|
Tx Admin/ Mick. On the ball as per
Why divide the year into fifty-two? Why divide the ensuing compartments into 6 + 1?
Working for the Bossman, from medieval times when it was invented imo Were they necessary before that? First known usage.
Weeks - 52 make a yearly cycle, spring to spring one day working on one's little plot as a villein/villain
I was trying to think of a practical context using this unit
365 divided by 7 = 6+1
Where did 6 come from if not the Babylonians/Sumerians?
Just a weekly cycle and as you ask why divi it up this way?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
Working for the Bossman, from medieval times when it was invented imo Were they necessary before that? First known usage. |
Since everyone has been working for the Bossman since the year dot, you'll have to explain why, INO, it was a medieval innovation.
Weeks - 52 make a yearly cycle, spring to spring one day working on one's little plot as a villein/villain |
Wouldn't any subdivision make a yearly cycle? Why should people get a day off? Jesus Christ, they get every evening and every night off as it is. But if it is found downtime improves productivity, why one day? Why not two? Why not two and dress-down Friday? Me, I'd have a Sabbath at the end of the week and an early closing on Wednesday.
I was trying to think of a practical context using this unit 365 divided by 7 = 6+1 |
And so you have but only by retro-fitting.
Where did 6 come from if not the Babylonians/Sumerians? |
So not medieval then.
Just a weekly cycle and as you ask why divi it up this way? |
The search goes on.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wile E. Coyote
In: Arizona
|
|
|
|
Nick Weech wrote: |
Just a weekly cycle |
Why are you so dismissive of cycles? Surely that it the more important part of your equation. We know that, according to Jesus, God created physical time, and according to Genesis God creates the world in 7 days.
BBC Bitesize wrote: |
In the beginning - God started creation
The first day - light was created
The second day - the sky was created
The third day - dry land, seas, plants and trees were created
The fourth day - the Sun, Moon and stars were created
The fifth day - creatures that live in the sea and creatures that fly were created
The sixth day - animals that live on the land and finally humans, made in the image of God were created
By day seven - God finished his work of creation and rested, making the seventh day a special holy day.
|
This is actually the foundation of the calendar. Early calendars are devised circular.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nick Weech
|
|
|
|
OK it's in the Bible
Cheers
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wile E. Coyote
In: Arizona
|
|
|
|
No problem, of course ortho will advise, humans have been using precise calculations of the motions of the stars, sun, and moon for thousands of years in order to help them hunt, and also to manage their crop cultivation and devise yearly calendars.... so maybe the simple and obvious concept of "Week" /"Wakes" (it's presumably based on the observation of days/nights) arranged in a 6 plus one 1 cycle, doesn't get as much attention as it should.
You can have yearly calendars without the weeks (it's a different set of observations). So why did god make it the foundation?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wile E. Coyote
In: Arizona
|
|
|
|
Six=Cease day......Ceases the week.
Severn=Sever day...... The rest day sabbath, before the next week, it severs the previous and starting weeks.
In Wiley's opinion.
Ceasaer = the one who ceases is worth a look (six) state of war
Crossing the Rubicon is the moment of severance. (severn)
Followed by Augustus (eight) peace on earth
6/7/8
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
This got lost in the meltdown, I'll post up Wiley rejoinders later
Why are you so dismissive of cycles? |
I wasn't dismissing cycles, only pointing out that if you divide the year into any regular segmentation, you produce a cycle. As you yourself pointed out, a seven-day cycle does not even produce an annual cycle, it falls one day short. Who lumbered God with a six-day week/plus one, anyway? Me, I'd have given him five days to do the lot and no bellyaching. I mean, come on, how long does it take to paint the sky if you use a roller? A six base is a lot more flexible than a seven. I'd tell him.
As for months...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
Wiley wrote: | Why are you so dismissive of cycles? Surely that it the more important part of your equartion. We know that according to Jesus, God created physical time, and according to Genesis God creates the world in 7 days. In the beginning - God started creation The first day - light was created The second day - the sky was created The third day - dry land, seas, plants and trees were created The fourth day - the Sun, Moon and stars were created The fifth day - creatures that live in the sea and creatures that fly were created The sixth day - animals that live on the land and finally humans, made in the image of God were created By day seven - God finished his work of creation and rested, making the seventh day a special holy day. This is actually the foundation of the calendar. |
How is that the basis of a calendar?
Early calendars are devised circular |
I'd like to know of a calendar that isn't circular. I suppose if you lived in a solar system with two suns you might need a non-circular one but I don't know if we do. I'll check.
Nick wrote: | OK it's in the Bible Cheers |
God must have got it from somewhere. So it's pre-Bible.
Wiley wrote: | No problem, of course ortho will advise, humans have been using precise calculations of the motions of the stars, sun, and moon for thousands of years, in order to help them hunt, and also to manage their crop cultivation |
Is ortho so dumb that they think hunters and farmers look at calendars? "Ooh, First of March, pet, the kalends. Best get the kale planted." Except in the case of (the Glorious) Twelfth of August when the grouse shooting season starts.
and devise yearly calendars.... |
Yes, then astonomical observation can be useful but not essential.
so maybe the simple and obvious concept of "Week" /"Wakes" |
Doesn't seem obvious or simple to me.
(it's presumably based on the observation of days/nights) arranged in a 6 plus one 1 cycle, doesn't get as much attention as it should. |
Nor should it. How does stellar observation lead to a six plus one cycle?
You can have yearly calendars without the weeks (it's a different set of observations) |
You can have yearly calendars with or without any subdivisions, but it's the same set of observations.
So why did god make it the foundation? |
You'll have to ask him, I can't make head nor tail of what you're saying.
Six=Cease day......Ceases the week. Severn=Sever day...... The rest day, sabbath, before the next week, it severs the previous and starting weeks. |
Whoever it was, they spoke English.
In Wiley's opinion.
Ceasaer = the one who ceases is worth a look (six) state of war
Crossing the Rubicon is the moment of severance (severn)
Followed by Augustus (eight) peace on earth
6/7/8 |
In Mick's opinion...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wile E. Coyote
In: Arizona
|
|
|
|
I'd like to know of a calendar that isn't circular. I suppose if you lived in a solar system with two suns you might need a non-circular one but I don't know if we do. I'll check. |
Early calendars did not portray time as a linear concept, unlike they do now. If you have a fixed starting point to your calendar which then adds cumulative years, it is in my opinon a different beast. I get that we travel round the sun at 365.24219 days. Really I do. But it's a shift in paradigm.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
You will have to tell me about one of these non-linear calendars of yours. I seem to remember accounts of Egyptian ones of fifteen months but I don't know if that is what you are referring to.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wile E. Coyote
In: Arizona
|
|
|
|
So do we agree that most of us perceive seven days into a week as being cyclical? The roughly four weeks in a month as being cyclical. The roughly three months into a season as being cyclical, and the four seasons in a year as being cyclical again.
Whilst we perceive years as linear?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
So do we agree that most of us perceive seven days into a week as being cyclical? |
Well, it's a repetitive pattern. I don't think many people would call it cyclical, though it is. Seven days is, I suppose, as good a number as any if you decide that multi-day segments are necessary.
The roughly four weeks in a month as being cyclical. |
If you choose seven days and if you decide you want to segment the year into twelve parts, then it follows. Months are a repetitive pattern though nobody I know would call then cyclical, though obviously they are.
The roughly three months into a season as being cyclical, |
What's a season? There's hot and there's cold. If you want an intermediate stage in between, that's your choice. It happens every year like clockwork so you can call it cyclical if you want.
and the four seasons in a year as being cyclical again. |
I think you just said that.
Whilst we perceive years as linear? |
I don't know the significance of the question mark. They are linear because they start at Jan 1st and end at 31st December. They are cyclical in the sense that the same thing will happen next year and every year after that, so far as I know.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|