Legion World Forums LEGION CLUBHOUSE The Legion of Super-Heroes Long Live the Legion! Interlac Numbering

would this be 3007

or is there a more complicated format for numbering in the 1000s

I don't know if we ever actually saw numbers that large, but I would assume that's how you would do it, given that the entire "language" is really just a replacement alphabet for English.

Is it?

Clearly the alpha part is just a simple replacement cipher, but the numeric part has never really sat well with me for several reasons:



1. Firstly, as it stands - as a direct replacement for our 10 digit number system - it's completely graphically non intuitive. 1-3 make sense; I'll even say, OK... 4 could be valid. But what is supposed to be represented by the combination of the 4 and 1 symbols for a 6... intuitively, wouldn't that be what a 5 should look like? And what on earth is the value of the line used in the 5 and 8 symbols? What could be added to a 4, such that a single addition would yield an increase of 1, and a second addition would yield an overall increase of 4? The only thing I can think is that it possibly could be the addition of a squared value: i.e. 4 + (1 squared) = 5 and 4 + (2 squared) = 8. But that seems ridiculously convoluted for a simple number system.

2. It is non-sequential. I could be wrong, here, but I'm unaware of any numbering system that would proceed sequentially from 1-9 and then proceed to the null value. Anybody with more background in this, feel free to correct me.

3. It is Terran-centric. For a supposed Intergalactic numbering system, why would they use a system based on 10? That's something that I'm assuming must have evolved for no other other reason than the simple fact that man has ten fingers... they are called "digits," after all. In a galaxy as diverse as the one in the 30th century, where creatures have three hands... four hands... no hands... whatever... that seems like those are "The Man's Numbers".


Anyway, I started to think... what would make more sense? What also uses a system that increases in 10 levels but would be more of a universal concept? Though I don't claim to know much about it, I did remember that String Theory in Physics posits a 10 dimensional model of existence. Doing a search on "10 Dimensions", I found a short video that... while I don't know has much to do with string theory... just amazed me with how well it fit into the graphic representation of the Interlac numbers.

When you get about 10 minutes watch the below video alongside the renumbered Interlac number line and prepare to have your mind blown. I only watched it once, so I might not have this 100% fleshed out, but here's the way I think it would break down (bear with me if I'm making up words below - I was raised on comic book logic).

In a nutshell, imagine that the Interlac characters are not 1 through 0, but rather, more intuitively, 0 through 9.




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCQx9U6awFw


0 through 3 - Spacial Description:

0 - The single dot representing a point: represents a no dimensional position

1 - Two dots through which could be drawn a line: represents a 1-D line/length

2 - Three dots through which could be decribed a plane: represents a 2-D shape/length & width

3 - A right triangle: represents a 3-D object/length, width, and depth (obviously the symbol is only 2-D, but it shows a continuous shape, representing tangibility)


4 through 7 - Temporal Description:

4 - A right triangle with a line: represents the object's duration - the fact that it exists through a time span, basically defining the entirety of the object's spacial positioning (4-D)

5 - A right triangle with a dot: represents the object's temporal probability - the fact that it is proceeding in a single timeline of which there are multiple

6 - A right triangle with two dots: represents the object's poteniality - the fact that it actually exists in multiple timelines concurrently

7 - A right triangle with two lines: represents the object's universiality - the fact that it exists through a space/time universe, basically defining the entirety of the object's spacial and temporal positioning (i.e. all of the object's durations through all potential timelines within a universe)


8 through 9 - Universal Description:

8 - An equilateral triangle: represents a universe - the fact that all spacial/temporal objects that are individually described in 7, are part of a single space/time system

9 - An equilateral triangle with a degree sign (different than the dot): represents the universe's multiversialty - the fact that the entire space/time system is contained within an infinite multiverse

Beyond this, there is no need the represent the entirety of the multiverse graphically, because the whole "super-system" is basically a singular description... sort of like... hmmm... a dot... which brings us back to 0.


I am in no way claiming that the above was the actual intent of the symbols used for the Interlac numbers... I'm just saying this way seems far more intuitive from a "comic-book" standpoint... and was a great way to waste the afternoon before vacation.

Wow, Ex. You've given this a lot of thought, perhaps moreso than Levitz and Giffen (whoever invented the Interlac numbering) did.

I think your explanations make sense, though, from a completely earth-centric or earth-intuitive perspective, I find it hard to accept the single dot as representing anything other than 1. Likewise, three dots suggests 3 to me.

But you're right that in an alien system where 10 is not the standard, something else would be the standard. From your representation above, eight would seem to be the beginning of a new subset, which suggests that seven is the standard? If this is the case, then three makes sense as the "half way" point, because, per your representation, three is "half" of seven.

Or something like that.

Maybe Interlac has found a way to get rid of fractions entirely.

In the words of Leopold Kronecker: "God made the integers; all else is the work of man."

Tell that to the folks who manufactured my computer keyboard!

Don't you go slaying my beautiful hypothesis with your ugly facts.


Cut to the Comic Covention during the Keith Giffen panel:

Ex: Mr. Giffen, how exactly do you explain the graphical inconsistencies in the Interlac numbering system?

Giff: A wizard did it. Next question.

Ah yes, when all else fails, blame it on Mysa.