Prev: To find out the installed packages repo section.
Next: How long squeez supported
From: Tom Furie on 1 Jun 2010 16:30
On Tue, Jun 01, 2010 at 02:32:26PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
> That's why whomever came up with the complete idiocy of breaking up 52
> weeks into 12 irregularly-sized months, days starting in the middle of
> the night and years in the middle of winter, should br brought behind the
> barn and flayed alive.

But, it isn't even 52 weeks. It's 52 weeks + 1 day, except in a leap
year, when it's 52 weeks + 2 days.

We need a new calendar system where 1 orbit of the sun really is 1 year,
rather than 1 year + ~6 hours. Or ignore the sun for calendrical systems
and switch to a lunar system. I suppose we could just make an hour about
0.000683 times longer.

Cheers,
Tom

--
Distance doesn't make you any smaller, but it does make you part of a
larger picture.
From: Rick Thomas on 1 Jun 2010 16:30

On Jun 1, 2010, at 3:32 PM, Ron Johnson wrote:

> That's why whomever came up with the complete idiocy of breaking up
> 52 weeks into 12 irregularly-sized months, days starting in the
> middle of the night and years in the middle of winter, should br
> brought behind the barn and flayed alive.

Given what we know of ancient Roman practices (and Babylonian before
them), it's safe to say that he very well might have suffered exactly
that fate... /-;

Enjoy!

Rick


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST(a)lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster(a)lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/540C48D2-4E91-4A10-8B5B-BEB78E733849(a)pobox.com
From: Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. on 1 Jun 2010 16:40
On Tuesday 01 June 2010 14:32:26 Ron Johnson wrote:
> On 06/01/2010 01:41 PM, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
> > (It may
> > not be entirely friendly, but any other behavior will be hard to reason
> > about because of inconsistencies.)
>
> That's why whomever came up with the complete idiocy of breaking up
> 52 weeks into 12 irregularly-sized months, days starting in the
> middle of the night and years in the middle of winter, should br
> brought behind the barn and flayed alive.

I think it was a collective work and that most of the key figures are long
since dead.

I'm open to suggestions on changing it, but there seems to be quite a bit of
momentum behind the current system. In addition, we are already working with
an astronomical clock that's not synced. (Really? 365.2425 days per year --
what exactly are the prime factors of that again?)

I vote for 25 hour days that start as soon as the midpoint of Sol crosses the
"ideal" horizon. The duration of a second might need to change. Ideally the
number of seconds per hour would remain a square number; it's root would
remain the number of seconds per minute and minutes per hour.

I vote for months that start on the first day after a "new moon". They'll
have 28-29 days, so we'll have about 13 of them a year, but New Year's Day
will drift a bit. (Why should January have all the fun, anyway?)
--
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. ,= ,-_-. =.
bss(a)iguanasuicide.net ((_/)o o(\_))
ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy `-'(. .)`-'
http://iguanasuicide.net/ \_/
From: John Hasler on 1 Jun 2010 19:30
Tom Furie writes:
> We need a new calendar system...

This _has_ been discussed:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calendar#Calendar_reform>
--
John Hasler


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST(a)lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster(a)lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87aarecq51.fsf(a)thumper.dhh.gt.org
First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2
Prev: To find out the installed packages repo section.
Next: How long squeez supported