Why was ternary, radix 3, not used as the basis for 12480?
Ternary certainly has many advantages and it could be used as the main computation base in the distant future. It is closest to the most economical radix, 2.718, and it is balanced: -1, 0, 1. It was not used for the basis of 12480 because it fails to be practical for universal use, it is not as applicable as binary, and it is an odd base. Ternary is not the simplest system so it is very possible that something may not be able to display the three states that are required in ternary. The economical part of ternary causes its powers to grow exponentially beyond what is practical–3, 9, 81, 6561. I suppose 33 (27) could be useful though. The odd radix is beneficial for balance centered around 0, but it also yields numbers that are difficult to work with. People cut things in half more than they cut things into thirds. 12480 is based off of binary numerically, but most of the time it is written with a third component, the break or space. In that way, 12480 is partly based off of ternary.
