divisibility

Maybe you underestimate how many numbers are weeded out just by checking divisibility by 3, 4 and 5?

Currencies are just commodities with certain aspects that make them good currencies: durability, portability, divisibility and uniformity.

That shouldn't affect carpenters who need divisibility by 2, 3 and 4 more than they need 5.

The check for divisibility by 3 will cause an abort for two out of three calls.

The check for divisibility by 4 will cause an abort of half of the remaining calls (as `val` is incremented).

Even if you're unfamiliar with the modulus operator, it's not that hard to test divisibility.

True, but my point was that imperial had those benefits of divisibility, yet we switched away from it...

It uses a string of '1' as a unary numeral representation of a number and then checks it for divisibility with 2,3,4...

In fact, the CRT works over any ring that has unique factorization and well-behaved divisibility (i.e., greatest common divisors work as in the integers).

The current limitations on divisibility are easy to change in the future.

Because it conflicted with our number system, and we (mostly...) decided that harmony with the number system was better than divisibility.

I only know how to test for divisibility (cleanly) because I looked it up in the course of doing Project Euler.

Commodities which already have value(!) become currencies because they have "durability, portability, fungibility, scarcity, divisibility, and recognizability".

If you look in Dixon's History of Number Theory under "divisibility rules", you'll essentially find dozens of rules, which can be adapted for any base (where "base" could mean 2^32, 2^64, 2^128, 2^(32*n), etc.).

Bitcoin has the characteristics of money (durability, portability, fungibility, scarcity, divisibility, and recognizability) based on the properties of mathematics rather than relying on physical properties (like gold and silver) or trust in central authorities (like fiat currencies)." What?