Interesting fact about 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9

[Aion]

I just wanted to share what I learned today about the Roman numerals. The idea is that the Hindu-Arabic numerals were originally chosen such that the number of interior angles in each shape corresponded to the numeral's value. While it might not be universally accepted or historically documented as the sole origin of these numerals, It's fascinating to consider this novel symbolism as the basis behind the shapes.

I apologise for my poor drawing skills

 

[khansaheb]

I just wanted to share what I learned today about the Roman numerals. The idea is that the Hindu-Arabic numerals were originally chosen such that the number of interior angles in each shape corresponded to the numeral's value. While it might not be universally accepted or historically documented as the sole origin of these numerals, It's fascinating to consider this novel symbolism as the basis behind the shapes.

I apologise for my poor drawing skills


View attachment 37786

View attachment 37788

Interesting - I have not heard of this before. Can you provide any reference to this observation?

 

[Dr.Peterson]

I just wanted to share what I learned today about the Roman numerals. The idea is that the Hindu-Arabic numerals were originally chosen such that the number of interior angles in each shape corresponded to the numeral's value. While it might not be universally accepted or historically documented as the sole origin of these numerals, It's fascinating to consider this novel symbolism as the basis behind the shapes.

I apologise for my poor drawing skills


View attachment 37786

View attachment 37788

Sorry, but that's nonsense. Please don't claim something is true when there is no historical evidence for it.

This is just someone's idea (apparently originating around 1900) that has no connection to reality. The original forms looked nothing like this. See here on "fanciful hypotheses", example V, and here for more details.

The truth is far more interesting (because it's true):

Hindu–Arabic numeral system - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Aion]

Sorry, but that's nonsense. Please don't claim something is true when there is no historical evidence for it.

This is just someone's idea (apparently originating around 1900) that has no connection to reality. The original forms looked nothing like this. See here on "fanciful hypotheses", example V, and here for more details.

The truth is far more interesting (because it's true):

Hindu–Arabic numeral system - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I'm not an expert and I apologise if this is false information. However, this fact seemed believable when I heard about it from this youtube video 20 min in. It's all good fun anyway I thought this fact was quite interesting whatever the case may be.

 

[Aion]

Also, I drew the five incorrectly.

 

[The Highlander]

Also, I drew the five incorrectly.

You mean you failed to modify it to fit with the theory!

 

[blamocur]

Please don't claim something is true when there is no historical evidence for it.

In defense of the OP I did not see this as a claim but as an implicit request for comments. But I still don't see how his rendition of 8 fits the hypothesis

 

[Dr.Peterson]

In defense of the OP I did not see this as a claim but as an implicit request for comments. But I still don't see how his rendition of 8 fits the hypothesis

Actually, the OP is only reporting what the video claimed as truth (that is, as learned rather than invented), and adding the fact that there is (maybe) no evidence for it, which I don't think the video says. So any blame goes to the latter.

Here's an image from the video, with angles marked (except for 9):

​

And here's the 1899 version from Cajori, marked similarly:

​