why the ratio of weight is 5:2:2:1 in weight box?
Answers
Answer:
Knowing what we do, my best bet would be that the 5-unit weight is more commonly used than the 4-unit weight, and so it is more desirable to have the 5-unit weight as a 'basic' weight rather than making it up from smaller weights (1+4). We can, though, afford to have the 4-unit weight as a combination of (2+2)
Why are the weights in a weight box kept to a ratio of 5:2:2:1?
This is interesting. There may well be a simple historical reason why this is so, but if I had to guess from a purely mathematical perspective…
First, observe that you can make every weight from 1 to 10 (units) using the above four weights.
1=1
2=2
3=1+2
4=2+2
5=5
6=1+5
7=2+5
8=1+2+5
9=2+2+5
10=1+2+2+5
Can we do the same thing simply using 4:3:2:1 instead? It turns out we can. So what gives?
Let us calculate the average number of weights required to make up a particular sum in both the cases. This average comes out to be 2.1 in the 5:2:2:1 case and, wait for it, 2.0 in the 4:3:2:1 case. We still don’t have an answer!
Knowing what we do, my best bet would be that the 5-unit weight is more commonly used than the 4-unit weight, and so it is more desirable to have the 5-unit weight as a ‘basic’ weight rather than making it up from smaller weights (1+4). We can, though, afford to have the 4-unit weight as a combination of (2+2).
answer by Arman
hope it helps you