Is the same goof being committed in other planets ?

[Externet]

Are +/- 90 north/south latitude degrees, +/- East/west 180 longitude degrees, 24 hours per revolution; 60 minutes and seconds subdivisions being used when exploring and charting other planets ?

 

Is the absence of the decimal system being carried to other worlds exploration in favor of the senseless duodecimal / sexagesimal / dozenal and earthly time divisions ?

Would it be better to start using a rational decimal system for -say 100 hours with decimals time- per revolution; dividing a circle in 'new' 100 degrees with decimals ?

 

Why yes and why not ?

 

<Sorry. title should spell 'committed'>

Edited January 21, 2013 by Externet

[John Cuthber]

You should move to revolutionary France.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Republican_Calendar

 

Or, perhaps we should learn what happens if you have two sets of units in use at the same time.

http://articles.cnn.com/1999-09-30/tech/9909_30_mars.metric_1_mars-orbiter-climate-orbiter-spacecraft-team?_s=PM:TECH

[Enthalpy]

A pre-requisite would be to first synchronize the years with the days.

Someone will certainly come with an easy method here.

[BearOfNH]

One tricky problem is determining the Prime Meridian, i.e., the line representing 0° longitude. It's arbitrary, but how do you decide?

[imatfaal]

You put it through the observatory of the most influential city - seems to work; even though the Parisians were hacked off about it for years. If it was being decided now I guess it would practically run close to a certain moderators backyard (USNO)- as it was determined many years ago it almost runs through mine (Royal Observatory)

[BearOfNH]

I was thinking more of the case of an uncivilized panet. Or at least, a planet without cities. You might pick the North pole and the top of the highest mountain and draw the PM thru those points, but that runs the risk of changing geologically.

 

If the planet is already inhabited and civilized, they probably also have their own PM.

[John Cuthber]

Boring answer for one rather small, but nearby rock.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selenographic_coordinates

 

Other planets

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Longitude#Longitude_on_bodies_other_than_Earth

[Ophiolite]

Are +/- 90 north/south latitude degrees, +/- East/west 180 longitude degrees, 24 hours per revolution; 60 minutes and seconds subdivisions being used when exploring and charting other planets ?

 

Is the absence of the decimal system being carried to other worlds exploration in favor of the senseless duodecimal / sexagesimal / dozenal and earthly time divisions ?

Would it be better to start using a rational decimal system for -say 100 hours with decimals time- per revolution; dividing a circle in 'new' 100 degrees with decimals ?

 

Why yes and why not ?

Can you suggest what benefits such a system would bring?

Edited January 24, 2013 by Ophiolite

[D H]

Is the absence of the decimal system being carried to other worlds exploration in favor of the senseless duodecimal / sexagesimal / dozenal and earthly time divisions ?

What makes you think that our current system for measuring angle and time is "senseless"? What would be senseless would be to mindless force the use a decimal system onto something where a decimal model is a bad fit. It would be a case of "a foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds".

 

A decimal-based approach for time works just fine when time is divided extremely finely. Physicists and others use milliseconds, microseconds, nanoseconds, and even smaller divisions of time all the time. The problem is that a decimal-based approach using the second as the unit of time just isn't that good a concept for larger interval of time. A decimal-based approach for time also works just fine when time is looked at very coarsely. Historians, geologists, and astronomers regularly use decades, centuries, millennia, and even larger powers of tens of years. The problem here is that a decimal-based approach using the year (what year?) as the unit of time isn't that good a concept for smaller intervals of time.

 

One issue is the physically inescapable fact that a day comprises 86,400 seconds (plus a few milliseconds; the length of a day is not constant), a year comprises 365.25 days (less a fraction, unless you are an astronomer). 86,400, 365.25, and a decimal-based system don't mix. Redefine the second so there are 100,000 seconds in a day? Good luck with that. You'll break *everything*. We are stuck with the second as the principal unit of time.

 

Even the French had to abandon their decimal-based approach for larger multiples of time in their French Republican Calendar. While a week comprised ten days, a month comprised three weeks, and a year comprised twelve of those months plus five or six "complementary days". The factor of ten approach just doesn't work with largish periods of time.

 

 

With regard to angle, the most rational way to represent angle is to use a completely irrational approach: Divide a circle into 2*pi parts.