Relative cent: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 155: | Line 155: | ||
|74.875 (4A.E01<sub>16</sub>) | |74.875 (4A.E01<sub>16</sub>) | ||
|''898.502 (382.81<sub>16</sub>) 7mu'' | |''898.502 (382.81<sub>16</sub>) 7mu'' | ||
|129 | |||
|1548 | |||
|''75.46'' | |||
|''905.522'' | |||
|130 | |||
|1560 | |||
|76.045 | |||
|''912.5415'' | |||
|131 | |||
|1572 | |||
|76.63 | |||
|919.561 | |||
|132 | |||
|1584 (E00<sub>12</sub>) | |||
|77.2151 (65.27<sub>12</sub>) | |||
|926.581 (652.6E7<sub>12</sub>) | |||
|133 | |||
|1596 | |||
|77.8 | |||
|933.6 | |||
|134 | |||
|1608 | |||
|78.385 | |||
|940.62 | |||
|135 | |||
|1620 | |||
|78.97 | |||
|947.639 | |||
|136 | |||
|1632 | |||
|79.555 | |||
|954.659 | |||
|137 | |||
|1644 | |||
|80.14 | |||
|961.678 | |||
|138 | |||
|1656 | |||
|80.725 | |||
|968.698 | |||
|139 | |||
|1668 | |||
|81.31 | |||
|975.7175 | |||
|140 | |||
|1680 (880<sub>14</sub>) | |||
|81.8948 (5B.C75<sub>14</sub>) | |||
|982.737 (502.A46<sub>14</sub>) | |||
|141 | |||
|1692 | |||
|82.48 | |||
|989.757 | |||
|142 | |||
|1704 | |||
|83.065 | |||
|996.776 | |||
|'''143''' | |||
|'''1716''' | |||
|'''83.65''' | |||
|'''1003.796''' | |||
|144 | |||
|1728 (1000<sub>12</sub>) | |||
|84.235 (70.299 <sub>12</sub>) | |||
|1010.82 (702.995 <sub>12</sub>) | |||
|} | |} | ||
In other words, only each 12th divisor of the next 28 after 100 has the same problem as 100 does for use as the base of a relative cent. Also, the last three have the problem that they put 3/2 in the middle of a cent. | In other words, only each 12th divisor of the next 28 after 100 has the same problem as 100 does for use as the base of a relative cent. Also, the last three have the problem that they put 3/2 in the middle of a cent. | ||