• sundray@lemmus.orgOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    Back in the olden days, we learned basic fractions before we learned to tell time, so we learned to think in quarters and halves of an hour. When I see a clock face, I usually just look to see what part of the hour we’re in without necessarily knowing what specific minute we’re at. “Oh, it’s nearly half passed,” is usually good enough, rather than having to be exact, “Oh, it’s 4:28pm precisely.” I suppose things have changed a lot since then – when I was in school we were too busy hiding from dinosaurs to learn much else!

    • webghost0101
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      I suppose that’s a good theory, a lot probably has to do with our own habits of compartmentalizing time. “nearly half passed” feels weird to say for what i perceive as the second mark of a 6 long cycle or almost the third mark. Grouping minutes per 10 is very decimal system, i think i learned fractions together with clock-faces in second grade so you had to learn both at the same time while digital notations just clicked and translated better to the clock based but still decimal math questions.

      When you get to minutes i am picking digital as the clear biased winner based on viewing angles in bad clock design alone, to many minutes have been wasted trying to figure them out.