Talk:Quaternary numeral system

Quits?

Logically, if a Binary Digit is a bit, and a Trinary Digit is a trit, should a Quaternary Digit be a quit? Or a quad (note the Star Trek reference.)?--Blasterman 95 21:46, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Probably a quad, in keeping with popular sci-fi. Technically, it'd be a quit, but that's already taken, so we'll go with quad. Besides, teraquad sounds so much cooler than teraquit! Skylerorlando (talk) 00:37, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

I just saw that some genetics people/person chose "qit" for a quaternary digit. They also defined "qyte" as three qits for their genetic-code purposes, but for computer science and in general I think a 4-qit qyte makes the most sense. I was also thinking of maybe quat (for quaternion) as 4 qits... or of course just use whatever object name happens to be the one getting represented in four qits.

As for a quad, that is a vastly larger unit of measurement; it's purposely undefined in Trek, though we could probably think of it as short for quadrillion. Walter Ian Kaye 04:37, 25 June 2022 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Boodlums (talk • contribs)

But what about quytes? 24.150.217.182 (talk) 13:59, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

There's no real reason why there has to be a special word for this in English... AnonMoos (talk) 23:56, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

There is an English word... forit. cerniagigante (talk) 15:20, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

2 + 2 = ... 10

IN BASE FOUR I'M FINE! 'FLaRN'(talk) 22:08, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Genetics example

The genetics example is interesting, but it is lacking in clarity. In particular, no rationale is provided for the particular mapping chosen. Why this particular mapping? Is it used in computer models, for example? Also, mention is made of complementary base pairs, but it is unclear what the analogous numeric complementarity represents. Sum of 3, perhaps? Basis vectors for a vector space?

As a result, the numeric example for the string GATTACA is misleading. It is presented in a way that suggests it is a canonical numeric mapping, but in fact there are 4!=24 different mappings possible, leading to what I only assume to be 24 different numbers for the word GATTACA. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.247.165.130 (talk) 22:42, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Does the mapping being arbitrary make it less useful as an example? -- AnonMoos (talk) 10:17, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

sound system

Love your written system. Its brilliant. The sound system seems a little primitive though.
I came up with the following system. In it one can count easily up to 256^256.
You can no doubt improve upon it (please improve upon it)

'e' is pronounced 'ay' and 'i' is pronounced 'ee'.

	fours	ones
0
1	ko	ka
2	lo	la
3	mo	ma

16	add -to
suffix	just add '-na'
256^n	tia + suffix

for example:

momato lola tialana lolato lola = [(3*4+3) * 16 + 2*4+2] * 256^2 + (2*4+2) * 16 + 2*4+2

it may seem a little complicated but its really about as simple as it can get.

just as we count in 1000's (million-billion-trillion-quadrillion) so this system counts in 256's

bi- tri- quad- is replace with a suffixes -lana -mana -kana

just as we might say 25 hundred and 31 (2,531) so in this system we use just replace 'hundred' with -to (16)

Just granpa (talk) 00:12, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

2021

You wrote, "Love your written system. Its brilliant. The sound system seems a little primitive though." May I ask what systems you were referring to? Arctic Gazelle (talk) 18:20, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

It's some kind of "conlang" thing... AnonMoos (talk) 00:29, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

Ventureño Numeral System

As per request, I've updated the page on the Ventureño Chumash language to include what was recorded of its quaternary system. Let me know if I can add anything to make it easier to read, more clear, etc. Alaquwel (talk) 08:12, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Quaternary numeral system. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20101214090439/http://2010.igem.org:80/files/presentation/Hong_Kong-CUHK.pdf to http://2010.igem.org/files/presentation/Hong_Kong-CUHK.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:18, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 December 2016

please change * to '''×''' because it's more realistic 178.42.213.16 (talk) 11:11, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

Not done: Please gain consensus for this change before using the {{edit protected}} template. -- Dane2007 ^talk 06:16, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

Its on senary(;95.49.247.157 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:30, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

I think it is the more standard mathematical symbol for multiplication. Programming languages tend to use * but this is a mathematics article not a programming article and the mathematical symbol is ×. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:24, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

 Done per David Eppstein. Double sharp (talk) 02:36, 5 December 2016 (UTC)