Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Off topic: Re: Highlights of tonight's chat

Expand Messages
  • relayer
    I ve always learned roman numerals using the following method. Regardless of the ordinal position, 1 thru 9 in that position is represented by the same amount
    Message 1 of 1 , Jul 20 12:23 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      I've always learned roman numerals using the following method.
      Regardless of the ordinal position, 1 thru 9 in that position is
      represented by the same amount of characters. Every fifth element
      changes the code. This code is introduced one value earlier using a
      subractive method. i.e. Four(IV) being one(I) less than five(V):

      1: I
      2: II
      3: III
      4: IV (the 'one' preceding the 'five' symbol is subtractive)
      5: V
      6: VI
      7: VII
      8: VIII
      9: IX (see number four)
      10: X

      20: XX
      30: XXX
      40: XL
      50: L
      60: LX
      70: LXX
      80: LXXX
      90: XC
      100: C

      etc...

      That particular roman numeral calculator probably substitutes
      characters with a face value and adds it all up. That's why MDCCCCI
      calculated to 1901

      --- In midatlanticretro@yahoogroups.com, "Evan" <evan947@y...> wrote:
      > Now, I **REALLY** like calling our museum MCMI, but the Roman
      numeral web
      > site also will accept MDCCCCI and other combinations as 1901. LOL,
      is
      > anyone here a math historian? Which is the "proper" format?
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.