Externet Posted February 16, 2015 Posted February 16, 2015 Greetings.We and science are stuck with the stupid heritage of1 day = 24 hours; x 60 = 1440 minutes; x 60 = 86400 seconds.Now translated to Cesium vibrations...Has there been ever an attempt to reform the units, to something like1 day = 100 'ruoh'; x 100 = 10000 'etunim'; x100 = 1000000 'dnoces' ( just to rename units )1 day = 1 million 'dnoces' or 1 Mdnoces (megadnoces) instead; 1 dnoces = 1 microdayOr anyhow in the decimal system that would make more sense ?If humans ever populate another planet, will the senseless second be carried there or that own planet rotation as base should be considered ?It would be a total science chaos to choose a different time unit today, yes. Too late for that.Before the first clock was invented centuries ago and someone decided to split its dial in 12 sections, not 10, not 100; how was time told ? Like noon; a while after sunset; a while and a half before sunrise ?
Strange Posted February 16, 2015 Posted February 16, 2015 Each day in the Republican Calendar was divided into ten hours, each hour into 100 decimal minutes, and each decimal minute into 100 decimal seconds. Thus an hour was 144 conventional minutes (more than twice as long as a conventional hour), a minute was 86.4 conventional seconds (44% longer than a conventional minute), and a second was 0.864 conventional seconds (13.6% shorter than a conventional second). Clocks were manufactured to display this decimal time, but it did not catch on. Mandatory use of decimal time was officially suspended 7 April 1795, although some cities continued to use decimal time as late as 1801.[7] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Republican_Calendar#Decimal_time The fact we inherited 60 minutes and seconds from Babylonians is almost a good reason to hang on to them. It is almost a tradition.
Enthalpy Posted February 17, 2015 Posted February 17, 2015 Nature doesn't help much neither, because a year contains no integer number of days, so even a simple number of seconds in a day wouldn't fit the year simply. The Republican calendar also changed the number of days in a year, and because of that, it would have shifted horribly in less than a century.
imatfaal Posted February 17, 2015 Posted February 17, 2015 Nature doesn't help much neither, because a year contains no integer number of days, so even a simple number of seconds in a day wouldn't fit the year simply. The Republican calendar also changed the number of days in a year, and because of that, it would have shifted horribly in less than a century. Aren't most calendars (ie apart from the Julian and Gregorian) lunar in basis - such that they do shift a few day each year ? Just a different outlook and perspective. And any calendar that names a month after a lobster dish gets my vote (although its probably the other way around)
Moontanman Posted February 17, 2015 Posted February 17, 2015 I thought imaginary time was the 11th dimension? I have read science fiction books about different ways of measuring time but for us to really understand they have to translated in some way, in the Gaean trilogy time was measured by Revolutions, shortened to revs and divided or multiplied by ten to make the time intervals easier to understand, 1000 revs was the Gaean month... comparable to 30 some days, i can't remember the exact number.
Strange Posted February 17, 2015 Posted February 17, 2015 although its probably the other way around Yep.
swansont Posted February 18, 2015 Posted February 18, 2015 There were a number of timescales used in the past. Some had equal time periods (24 hrs a day), but others always had 12 hours of daylight and 12 of night. Lots of timekeeping methods started at sunset or sunrise, rather than a fixed noon/midnight (which aren't really fixed, because the solar day isn't actually 86400 seconds long) http://www.sundials.co.uk/tbhou.htm http://www.euarchives.org/index.php?sch=3&lng=en&pge=why&cty=prague&nr=1_5
Enthalpy Posted February 18, 2015 Posted February 18, 2015 Aren't most calendars (ie apart from the Julian and Gregorian) lunar in basis? [...] The calendars with 28/29/30/31 days must inherit from lunar calendars as well. Though, the lunar ones I've heard of add a special month some years in order to re-synchronize with the seasons. This means a maximum 14 days bias, a significant drawback. And since the Moon's period is no integer number of days, well, you guess.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now