Are you saying that a better way to measure perceived time is something like "1 year, 2 more years, 4 more years, 8 more years," starting from birth, and maybe call each of those increments a "log year"? I like it.

I guess the "natural" base to use to get the "right" number of increments is a pointless exercise, since it ultimately bottoms out in the question of "why is a regular year as long as it is?", but if we assume a base of 2, I'm currently in my 6th log year, and hope to die comfortably into my 7th. Actuarial odds are >80% in my favor.

Yes! But I do agree, six or seven units are not enough.

Extending the music analogy, we could call those powers of two "octaves", and divide it into twelve exponentially-spaced steps (i.e. 2^(years/12)).

The break even is about 75 steps (i.e. six octaves and three steps), which is about 76 years, since 2^(75/12) = 76.1.