The perpetual calendar
in [Math]
|
Prev: THE MIND OF MATHEMATICIANS PART 7 " SPATIAL MATHEMATICS , VALUE OF 1 and 3
Next: Exactly why the theories of relativity are complete nonsense- the basic mistake exposed!
From: Brian M. Scott on 19 Feb 2010 17:05 On 19 Feb 2010 01:06:25 -0800, R H Draney <dadoctah(a)spamcop.net> wrote in <news:hllkah0nkl(a)drn.newsguy.com> in sci.math,sci.physics,sci.astro,sci.lang,alt.usage.english: > James Hogg filted: >>Andrew Usher wrote: >>> Owing to the inconveniences which attend the shifting of >>> the calendar, and attempting in passing to create a >>> more perfect Church calendar, I say the following: [...] >> Give the sound of your name, I suppose you would also >> renumber the years, with year 1 in what is now 4004 BC. > I'm taking a survey...how many were thinking something > along the same lines?... I was. [...] Brian
From: Jonathan Morton on 19 Feb 2010 17:07 "Yusuf B Gursey" <ybg(a)theworld.com> wrote in message news:896542a4-e823-450a-8450-86d878949925(a)w31g2000yqk.googlegroups.com... >Easter is a moveable feast, meaning it is not fixed in relation to the >civil calendar. The First Council of Nicaea (325) established the date >of Easter as the first Sunday after the full moon (the Paschal Full >Moon) following the vernal equinox.[3] Ecclesiastically, the equinox >is reckoned to be on March 21 (regardless of the astronomically >correct date), and the "Full Moon" is not necessarily the >astronomically correct date. The date of Easter therefore varies >between March 22 and April 25. It does, but at present (certainly until 2199, at which point we move to a new table) it is not capable of falling on 22 March. Of course we had 23 March in 2008 and there's a 24 April coming up next year. Regards Jonathan
From: Jonathan Morton on 19 Feb 2010 17:07 "Yusuf B Gursey" <ybg(a)theworld.com> wrote in message news:896542a4-e823-450a-8450-86d878949925(a)w31g2000yqk.googlegroups.com... >Easter is a moveable feast, meaning it is not fixed in relation to the >civil calendar. The First Council of Nicaea (325) established the date >of Easter as the first Sunday after the full moon (the Paschal Full >Moon) following the vernal equinox.[3] Ecclesiastically, the equinox >is reckoned to be on March 21 (regardless of the astronomically >correct date), and the "Full Moon" is not necessarily the >astronomically correct date. The date of Easter therefore varies >between March 22 and April 25. It does, but at present (certainly until 2199, at which point we move to a new table) it is not capable of falling on 22 March. Of course we had 23 March in 2008 and there's a 24 April coming up next year. Regards Jonathan
From: Brian M. Scott on 19 Feb 2010 17:09 On Fri, 19 Feb 2010 19:38:08 +0000, Ant�nio Marques <antonioprm(a)sapo.pt> wrote in <news:hlmpb4$c42$1(a)news.eternal-september.org> in sci.math,sci.physics,sci.astro,sci.lang,alt.usage.english: [...] > Chocolate bunnies and eggs, you can put them everywhere > you like, but that's not Easter. For me, growing up, that was exactly Easter. It was a minor holiday, along with Thanksgiving and Hallowe'en; the major holiday was Christmas. Brian
From: Cheryl on 19 Feb 2010 17:11
Andrew Usher wrote: > On Feb 19, 3:07 pm, Ant�nio Marques <antonio...(a)sapo.pt> wrote: > >>>> The reason I fix Christmas to a Sunday has been my observation that >>>> arranging a family Christmas is substantially more convenient when it >>>> falls on a weekend than in the middle of the week. Given that Christmas >>>> is the most important holiday in the year, should we not all get at >>>> least a 3-day weekend, which we have for lesser holidays? >>> Less than around 30% of the world population cares about Christmas or >>> Easter or think that "Christmas is the most important holiday in the >>> year". >> Well, but for those who don't it doesn't really matter one way or the other >> what day Christmas and Easter Sunday are, does it? So what relevance do they >> have for you to bring them along? Or was it just the desire to sound clever? > > Right, and I figure that my calendar would be no worse than the > present for those that don't. > > Indeed, I considered this problem purely as a logical one; as I've > stated, I don't consider myself Christian, I adopted the Church > calendar as a base only because it makes the problem more interesting. > > I didn't consider my calendar complete until I worked out my new leap > year rule (Rule #3) - it not only ensures that both Christmas and > Easter are within 7-day periods despite being a constant distance from > each other and having leap day in between, it simultaneously causes > there to be exactly 52 Sundays in every year if you take out Nov. 1 > which is All Saints' day; this immediately allows te to draw up a > permanent list of the Sundays in the year with their traditional > Christian designations, and then follow the perpetual calendar. > > And I moved the start of the week numbering to August from Nov. 1 so > that the academic year and the US football season would be on the > fixed schedule, and I think there can be no objection to that. The > holidays I consider are Christmas and Easter (and of course the Church > festivals fixed to them, but hardly anyone cares anymore), and US > Thanksgiving - but other civil holidays could easily be fixed to the > same if they are now observed on a Monday, say, or otherwise not fixed > to a particular date. > > Andrew Usher Which academic year are you considering? I can think of several variations - K-12 vs universities and colleges, to begin with, and there are even variations among the K-12 school years in different jurisdictions - and even within the same one, in places where some schools have a year-round schedule. I will confess to being totally indifferent to the US football schedule. In fact, I couldn't tell you what it is now, except for a vague impression that it occurs in the fall, or possibly winter. -- Cheryl |