We didn't decide to have 360 degrees in a circle.
Uh, sure we did. The Babylonians chose 360, not because some intrinsic property of circles suggests division into 360 parts, but merely because it has many integer factors. There's no mathematical reason why decimal divisions couldn't be used. In fact, such a scale already exists- gradians, where a gradian equals 10/9 degrees. A whole circle equals 400 gradians then, making a right angle 100 radians. It's not used very often, since it's a pretty pointless scale- there's no advantage compared with degrees, other than multiples of 10 commonly cropping up. If you want a division based on intrinsic properties of the circle, well, use radians. After several physics courses, they've definitely become my preferred system- I think in radians, and then perhaps convert to degrees if it's called for. For both radians and gradians, conversions are fairly easy- no need for a table, just the ability to multiply fractions. Any other invented system would be just as easy. I could develop a decimal circle system composed of 100 intervals- call them "slashdots." Half a circle would be 50 slashdots, and a right angle (quarter circle) would be 25 slashdots. Makes sense, doesn't it? The slashdot system makes calculations of angles or rotations much larger than one full circle much easier: 9.5 rotations are equal to 3420 degrees, but also 950 slashdots. The only problem with the slashdot circle system is the same one the Babylonians avoided with a 360 degree circle: integer factors. The rather important angle known as 45 degrees or pi/4 radians becomes 12.5 slashdots. Much, much worse, the angle known as 60 degrees or pi/3 radians becomes 16 2/3 slashdots! 360 wasn't chosen because of some special relationship to the circle. Far from it- some of the numbers with intrinsic relationship to the geometry of the circle include transcendentals like pi and e. If the Babylonians couldn't handle fractions, I'd imagine these would be a problem if they had discovered them. 360 was chosen because it is evenly divisible by 1,2,3,4,5,6,8,9,10,12,15,18,20,24,30,36,40,45,60, 72,90,120,180, and 360- no further reason needed.
I'm a lefty, and on my home computer I mouse with my left hand. However, I keep the right handed button configuration, and left-click with my middle finger and right click with the index finger. At work, my mouse is one of those evil right-handed contoured things , so I use it as it was misdesigned. In that case it's somewhat advantageous since I can mouse with my right hand and write with my left hand (I cannot write coherently with the right hand, about the only thing I can't do ambidextrously). Using someone else's computer, I'll usually leave the mouse where they have it, unless I'm using the computer to play an FPS- I'm so used to aiming and firing with the left (with the righty config) and moving with IJKL with the right that I can't play well otherwise. If I ever were to buy something like the Voyager, I suppose I would probably use it right-handed, especially since it isn't particularly designed for gaming anyway.
We didn't decide to have 360 degrees in a circle. Uh, sure we did. The Babylonians chose 360, not because some intrinsic property of circles suggests division into 360 parts, but merely because it has many integer factors. There's no mathematical reason why decimal divisions couldn't be used. In fact, such a scale already exists- gradians, where a gradian equals 10/9 degrees. A whole circle equals 400 gradians then, making a right angle 100 radians. It's not used very often, since it's a pretty pointless scale- there's no advantage compared with degrees, other than multiples of 10 commonly cropping up. If you want a division based on intrinsic properties of the circle, well, use radians. After several physics courses, they've definitely become my preferred system- I think in radians, and then perhaps convert to degrees if it's called for. For both radians and gradians, conversions are fairly easy- no need for a table, just the ability to multiply fractions. Any other invented system would be just as easy. I could develop a decimal circle system composed of 100 intervals- call them "slashdots." Half a circle would be 50 slashdots, and a right angle (quarter circle) would be 25 slashdots. Makes sense, doesn't it? The slashdot system makes calculations of angles or rotations much larger than one full circle much easier: 9.5 rotations are equal to 3420 degrees, but also 950 slashdots. The only problem with the slashdot circle system is the same one the Babylonians avoided with a 360 degree circle: integer factors. The rather important angle known as 45 degrees or pi/4 radians becomes 12.5 slashdots. Much, much worse, the angle known as 60 degrees or pi/3 radians becomes 16 2/3 slashdots! 360 wasn't chosen because of some special relationship to the circle. Far from it- some of the numbers with intrinsic relationship to the geometry of the circle include transcendentals like pi and e. If the Babylonians couldn't handle fractions, I'd imagine these would be a problem if they had discovered them. 360 was chosen because it is evenly divisible by 1,2,3,4,5,6,8,9,10,12,15,18,20,24,30,36,40,45,60, 72,90,120,180, and 360- no further reason needed.
I'm a lefty, and on my home computer I mouse with my left hand. However, I keep the right handed button configuration, and left-click with my middle finger and right click with the index finger. At work, my mouse is one of those evil right-handed contoured things , so I use it as it was misdesigned. In that case it's somewhat advantageous since I can mouse with my right hand and write with my left hand (I cannot write coherently with the right hand, about the only thing I can't do ambidextrously). Using someone else's computer, I'll usually leave the mouse where they have it, unless I'm using the computer to play an FPS- I'm so used to aiming and firing with the left (with the righty config) and moving with IJKL with the right that I can't play well otherwise. If I ever were to buy something like the Voyager, I suppose I would probably use it right-handed, especially since it isn't particularly designed for gaming anyway.