# Is (or was) there anything inherently numeric about phone numbers?
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-or-was-there-anything-inherently-numeric-about-phone-numbers/846905
**Category:** Factual Questions
**Created:** [January 24, 2020, 5:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-or-was-there-anything-inherently-numeric-about-phone-numbers/846905 "2020-01-24T17:18:15Z")
**Posts on this page:** 20
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)
#### Post date: [January 24, 2020, 5:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-or-was-there-anything-inherently-numeric-about-phone-numbers/846905/1 "2020-01-24T17:18:15Z")
Question is whether the numbers in phone numbers represent quantities of anything, or whether they’re just being used purely as symbols (similar to sodoku). If the latter, were they initially used because at some point in phone technology they did represent numeric quantities or were they always just handy symbols?
ISTR at some point there were phones where after each entry you heard a number of clicks corresponding to the number dialed, but – even if I’m remembering correctly to begin with – that may have been artificially added and not inherent to the system.
(I was contemplating the notion of a system of phone numbers where letters of the alphabet were used instead of numbers. It would be easier to remember the – shorter – phone “numbers”, but would make for a less functional keyboard.)
---
### Author:  [@GreenWyvern](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GreenWyvern)
#### Post date: [January 24, 2020, 5:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-or-was-there-anything-inherently-numeric-about-phone-numbers/846905/2 "2020-01-24T17:37:18Z")
Wow! Somebody who has never heard of rotary dial phones. :D
---
### Author:  [@GreysonCarlisle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GreysonCarlisle)
#### Post date: [January 24, 2020, 5:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-or-was-there-anything-inherently-numeric-about-phone-numbers/846905/3 "2020-01-24T17:45:06Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#):
>
> (I was contemplating the notion of a system of phone numbers where letters of the alphabet were used instead of numbers. It would be easier to remember the – shorter – phone “numbers”, but would make for a less functional keyboard.)
Will the system include [Q and Z](https://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/351/why-is-there-no-q-on-the-telephone-dial/)?
---
### Author:  [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)
#### Post date: [January 24, 2020, 5:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-or-was-there-anything-inherently-numeric-about-phone-numbers/846905/4 "2020-01-24T17:49:02Z")
> [@GreenWyvern](#):
>
> Wow! Somebody who has never heard of rotary dial phones. :D
Unless there’s some more meaning to this comment than is readily apparent, you appear to have misunderstood the question.
---
### Author:  [@gnoitall](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gnoitall)
#### Post date: [January 24, 2020, 5:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-or-was-there-anything-inherently-numeric-about-phone-numbers/846905/5 "2020-01-24T17:54:44Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#):
>
> ISTR at some point there were phones where after each entry you heard a number of clicks corresponding to the number dialed, but – even if I’m remembering correctly to begin with – that may have been artificially added and not inherent to the system.
That was dialing. The clicks were voltage pulses – actually voltage interruption pulses – and the central office decoded the clicks by advancing a 10-position switch once per pulse. So the number you dialed equaled a number of pulses equaled a switch position to physically select a path through the central office switch frame to connect your phone to the destination phone.
Because it was a mechanical system, 10 values per dialing position were a reasonable value for [a mechanical switch system](https://youtu.be/xZePwin92cI?t=98) to be designed. Besides, how small are your fingers? [10 positions on a dial](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotary_dial#/media/File:Rotarydial.JPG) worked from a human-factors perspective as well.
---
### Author:  [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)
#### Post date: [January 24, 2020, 5:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-or-was-there-anything-inherently-numeric-about-phone-numbers/846905/6 "2020-01-24T17:55:05Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#):
>
> ISTR at some point there were phones where after each entry you heard a number of clicks corresponding to the number dialed, but – even if I’m remembering correctly to begin with – that may have been artificially added and not inherent to the system.
You’re recalling correctly.
Here’s [a demonstration of how you dialed a rotary phone](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u52UUO6vN-E) and [another video of the technology inside the phone](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Skwq5Y1-HJo).
---
### Author:  [@Andy\_L](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Andy_L)
#### Post date: [January 24, 2020, 5:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-or-was-there-anything-inherently-numeric-about-phone-numbers/846905/7 "2020-01-24T17:56:55Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#):
>
> Question is whether the numbers in phone numbers represent quantities of anything, or whether they’re just being used purely as symbols (similar to sodoku). If the latter, were they initially used because at some point in phone technology they did represent numeric quantities or were they always just handy symbols?
>
> ISTR at some point there were phones where after each entry you heard a number of clicks corresponding to the number dialed, but – even if I’m remembering correctly to begin with – that may have been artificially added and not inherent to the system.
>
> (I was contemplating the notion of a system of phone numbers where letters of the alphabet were used instead of numbers. It would be easier to remember the – shorter – phone “numbers”, but would make for a less functional keyboard.)
The clicks were not artificial - they were a direct representation of the interruption of the signal as the dial returned to its rest state, and the number of interruptions/clicks corresponded to the number being dialed. Early push button phones recreated the clicks as the way the push buttoning interfaced with a system expecting clicks.
---
### Author:  [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)
#### Post date: [January 24, 2020, 6:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-or-was-there-anything-inherently-numeric-about-phone-numbers/846905/8 "2020-01-24T18:01:46Z")
> [@gnoitall](#):
>
> That was dialing. The clicks were voltage pulses – actually voltage interruption pulses – and the central office decoded the clicks by advancing a 10-position switch once per pulse. So the number you dialed equaled a number of pulses equaled a switch position to physically select a path through the central office switch frame to connect your phone to the destination phone.
And if i remember correctly, there were techniques to dial using the hang-up switch by tapping it.
---
### Author:  [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)
#### Post date: [January 24, 2020, 6:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-or-was-there-anything-inherently-numeric-about-phone-numbers/846905/9 "2020-01-24T18:03:38Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#):
>
> I was contemplating the notion of a system of phone numbers where letters of the alphabet were used instead of numbers. It would be easier to remember the – shorter – phone “numbers”, but would make for a less functional keyboard.
It was probably just an issue of functionality. It would have been more difficult to design a dialing system with twenty-six separate positions than one with ten separate positions. (IIRC there were times when phone misread a digit even with just ten of them.)
And I question whether the mnemonics would have been that much better. You still would have had to remember a random string of characters. It would have been a shorter string with twenty-six characters rather than ten but you would have had more characters to confuse together.
Diving into the issue of psychology, it may be easier to remember a string of numbers rather than a string of letters because we don’t associate strings of numbers with words and that minimizes the possible confusion. If we were memorizing strings of random letters, our brains might end up getting them mixed up with our memorized vocabulary.
---
### Author:  [@OldGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/OldGuy)
#### Post date: [January 24, 2020, 6:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-or-was-there-anything-inherently-numeric-about-phone-numbers/846905/10 "2020-01-24T18:20:39Z")
Up until the 60s and we went to all digit dialing. Phone numbers were things like Klondike 4-3246. Klondike meant 55 because both K an L were associated with the 5 dial position (or later button). KL4 was called the exchange and was usually associated with a particular telephone “office”. Pretty much everyone in your neighborhood had a number that started KL4. Next neighborhood over might be YEllowstone 2. You knew approximately where your friend lived by knowing the exchange
---
### Author:  [@beowulff](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/beowulff)
#### Post date: [January 24, 2020, 6:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-or-was-there-anything-inherently-numeric-about-phone-numbers/846905/11 "2020-01-24T18:28:34Z")
> [@OldGuy](#):
>
> Up until the 60s and we went to all digit dialing. Phone numbers were things like Klondike 4-3246. Klondike meant 55 because both K an L were associated with the 5 dial position (or later button). KL4 was called the exchange and was usually associated with a particular telephone “office”. Pretty much everyone in your neighborhood had a number that started KL4. Next neighborhood over might be YEllowstone 2. You knew approximately where your friend lived by knowing the exchange
This is (apparently) a “US thing.”
I once worked for a company that listed their phone number as 1-800-444-CRAP. One of our contractors in England had to get is kid’s Fisher-Price toy telephone out to figure out what “CRAP” meant in numbers.
---
### Author:  [@md2000](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/md2000)
#### Post date: [January 24, 2020, 6:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-or-was-there-anything-inherently-numeric-about-phone-numbers/846905/12 "2020-01-24T18:33:24Z")
Before touch-tone (tone dialing) pulse was simpler- it could be done with relays and 1910’s technology instead of fancy electronics. Determining number pressed by tone required some moderately fancy electronics - in the phone and the switch office. That tech would cost serious bucks. IIRC some of the smaller more stodgy regional phone companies had to be dragged kicking and screaming into the 20th century in the early 90’s. By then switch technology was a LOT cheaper.
Then over the 90’s and 00’s, most phone companies stopped allowing pulse dialing. Also, most do not support the power required 48V mechanical bells any more.
---
### Author:  [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)
#### Post date: [January 24, 2020, 7:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-or-was-there-anything-inherently-numeric-about-phone-numbers/846905/13 "2020-01-24T19:15:39Z")
> [@Saint\_Cad](#):
>
> And if i remember correctly, there were techniques to dial using the hang-up switch by tapping it.
I used to “dial” that way, just for fun! I had trouble with 8, 9 and 0 (actually 10). My ‘9’ might be interpreted as ‘63’, say, or ‘81’ since even a slight pause meant ‘end-of-digit.’ Nine rapid clicks without pause were needed, but that was hard for clumsy me.
---
### Author:  [@TXCowboy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TXCowboy)
#### Post date: [January 24, 2020, 7:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-or-was-there-anything-inherently-numeric-about-phone-numbers/846905/14 "2020-01-24T19:44:11Z")
> [@Andy\_L](#):
>
> The clicks were not artificial - they were a direct representation of the interruption of the signal as the dial returned to its rest state, and the number of interruptions/clicks corresponded to the number being dialed. Early push button phones recreated the clicks as the way the push buttoning interfaced with a system expecting clicks.
No data to back this up but I was told by someone who worked for the phone company back in the 60’s-70’s. The reason the numbers are laid out top to bottom on a phone is so they are opposite of a 10 key adding machine. The reason was when they first started designing the push button phones (that still used the pulse/clicks), they found that secretaries who were used to operating adding machines would key the number in too fast and overload the pulses. They reversed the number layout so they would have to slow down when dialing.
---
### Author:  [@Bayaker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bayaker)
#### Post date: [January 24, 2020, 7:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-or-was-there-anything-inherently-numeric-about-phone-numbers/846905/15 "2020-01-24T19:56:28Z")
> [@septimus](#):
>
> I used to “dial” that way, just for fun! I had trouble with 8, 9 and 0 (actually 10). My ‘9’ might be interpreted as ‘63’, say, or ‘81’ since even a slight pause meant ‘end-of-digit.’ Nine rapid clicks without pause were needed, but that was hard for clumsy me.
I used to do it for fun when I was about ten years old.
A few years later I had a friend who worked at the ticket booth of an old rundown movie theater. There was a phone in the booth for answering show-time questions and such, but ticket sellers got real bored on slow days(there were a lot of them) and tended to want make phone calls to friends. The theater didn’t want customers to get a busy signal while an employee was catching up on gossip, so there was a lock on the dial.
The old tap-on-the-hook trick easily bypassed the intent of the lock. My buddy also figured out that it was easier to do a quick ten taps to get the operator than to successfully tap out a full seven digit number. Operators were happy to place a call for you. My friend didn’t work there long. He was fired for _receiving_ too many personal calls. They never figured out that he was making them.
---
### Author:  [@whitetho](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/whitetho)
#### Post date: [January 24, 2020, 9:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-or-was-there-anything-inherently-numeric-about-phone-numbers/846905/16 "2020-01-24T21:26:42Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#):
>
> Question is whether the numbers in phone numbers represent quantities of anything, or whether they’re just being used purely as symbols (similar to sodoku). If the latter, were they initially used because at some point in phone technology they did represent numeric quantities or were they always just handy symbols?
Nowadays they are generally just symbols. However, originally, although the numbers didn’t have any intrinsic technical meaning, they were found to be very useful for organizing manual switchboard plugs.
The earliest manual switchboard telephones systems were used to connect together the wires leading to the two callers. In a small setting, say a business’ internal telephone system, it would be possible to label the plugs by name, so if someone called for “Mr. Big” there would be a plug with his name. But this would quickly become cumbersome in a municipal system, and the natural solution was to come up with some sort of numbering scheme. An analogy is that a small bed-and-breakfast can organize its rooms by descriptive names, but a hotel needs a numbering scheme.
Another example is bank accounts, which long ago were organized by owners’ names, instead of account numbers.
---
### Author:  [@MrFloppy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrFloppy)
#### Post date: [January 24, 2020, 10:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-or-was-there-anything-inherently-numeric-about-phone-numbers/846905/17 "2020-01-24T22:18:19Z")
> [@beowulff](#):
>
> This is (apparently) a “US thing.”
Nope, my childhood phone number in London (1960s/1970s) was “Tudor 1087” TUD was 883 and that’s how Mum answered the phone.
Finchley (down the road) was FIN or 346, Highgate (up the road) was HIG or 444.
There is a list of them [HERE.](http://rhaworth.net/phreak/tenp_01.php)
---
### Author:  [@Frankenstein\_Monster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frankenstein_Monster)
#### Post date: [January 24, 2020, 10:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-or-was-there-anything-inherently-numeric-about-phone-numbers/846905/18 "2020-01-24T22:31:35Z")
> [@whitetho](#):
>
> In a small setting, say a business’ internal telephone system, it would be possible to label the plugs by name, so if someone called for “Mr. Big” there would be a plug with his name. But this would quickly become cumbersome in a municipal system, and the natural solution was to come up with some sort of numbering scheme.
Apparently, numbers were used from the very start, the moment phone lines were constructed.
According to [this](https://www.1900s.org.uk/1920s60s-windup-phones.htm#early-exchanges):
> [@](#):
>
> When the operator answered we heard her ask for the **number** we wanted, which of course we said…
>
> Our operator knew everyone on her exchange by name **and number** because there were so few subscribers. At first there were only eight. The post office itself was number one and the local police station was number two. My grandparents’ home was number three and we were number four. The numbers were allocated in the order in which householders subscribed, and they were connected in that order. Another number was for the next exchange which was used for routing calls to remote exchanges.
The numbers already existed at the time automated dialing was invented.
The original automated dialing tech, using those large 10-position relays was developed precisely to work with the existing system of telephone numbers consisting of digits between zero and nine.
---
### Author:  [@bob\_2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bob_2)
#### Post date: [January 24, 2020, 11:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-or-was-there-anything-inherently-numeric-about-phone-numbers/846905/19 "2020-01-24T23:03:10Z")
We can’t discuss this without at least a nod to a Kansas undertaker called Almon Brown Strowger. It was he who invented the Strowger switch, which made automatic dialling possible.
> **[Almon Brown Strowger](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Almon_Brown_Strowger)**
>
> Almon Brown Strowger (February 11, 1839 – May 26, 1902) was an American inventor who gave his name to the Strowger switch, an electromechanical telephone exchange technology that his invention and patent inspired.
> Strowger was born in Penfield, New York, near Rochester, the grandson of the second settler and first miller in Penfield. Little is known about his early life. It is said that if his mother gave her children a task, Strowger and his brothers would often try to devise a machine to do ...
---
### Author:  [@beowulff](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/beowulff)
#### Post date: [January 24, 2020, 11:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-or-was-there-anything-inherently-numeric-about-phone-numbers/846905/20 "2020-01-24T23:28:07Z")
> [@MrFloppy](#):
>
> Nope, my childhood phone number in London (1960s/1970s) was “Tudor 1087” TUD was 883 and that’s how Mum answered the phone.
>
> Finchley (down the road) was FIN or 346, Highgate (up the road) was HIG or 444.
>
> There is a list of them [HERE.](http://rhaworth.net/phreak/tenp_01.php)
Interesting, because our consultant was in the London area, and his phone didn’t have letters on it. I wonder if it got phased out by the 90’s.
[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-or-was-there-anything-inherently-numeric-about-phone-numbers/846905.md?page=2)