BUT WHY DECIMAL?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
10 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

BUT WHY DECIMAL?

Phil De Rosa
DECIMAL WEEK - 30 DAY MONTH 7 DAY WEEK–30 DAY MONTH

Scott Colmes writes; “But why decimal?     

 

       DECIMAL WEEK - 30 DAY MONTH                           7 DAY WEEK–30 DAY MONTH

 

01   02   03   04   05   06   07   08   09   10                  01   02   03   04   05   06   07

11   12   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   20                  08   09   10   11   12   13   14

21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30                  15   16   17   18   19   20   21

                                                                                     22   23   24   25   26   27   28

                                                                                     29   30

 

01   02   03   04   05   06   07   08   09   10                                01   02   03   04   05             

11   12   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   20                  06   07   08   09   10   11   12

21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30                  13   14   15   16   17   18   19

                                                                                     20   21   22   23   24   25   26

                                                                                     27   28   29   30

 

01   02   03   04   05   06   07   08   09   10                                              01   02   03  

11   12   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   20                  04   05   06   07   08   09   10

21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30                  11   12   13   14   15   16   17

                                                                                     18   19   20   21   22   23   24

                                                                                     25   26   27   28   29   30

 

Using 30 day months this decimal calendar presupposes: a solar calendar, a few hundred years hence when the world will be ready for real calendar simplification, an affluent and educated world, input from and for civil society, and a desire to eliminate as many mundane irritants from our ever increasing stressful lives.

 

Using the clumsy Gregorian 28, 29, 30, and 31 day months makes the 7 day week look even more nonsensical. But there are several viable alternative 7 day week proposals.

 

This visually shows only the uniformity and simplicity of 10 days as opposed to 7 days.

These could also be shown in an ISO style quarterly 90 or yearly 360 continuous day count. If one was commissioned to design the simplest calendar possible one would come up with a decimal calendar configuration. But today’s world is not ready to accept it.  

 

If I had been a God I would have devised an exact 360 day tropical year or better yet a 400 day decimal year that would have had 100 day quarters composed of 2 subdivisions (‘months’ for lack of a better name) of five 10 day weeks each. Alas it was not to be and we are obliged to break our heads over a 365.2424 day year. I also would have given the moon its own light source so that we would have had a bright full moon every night.

 

This doesn’t touch upon the questions of where to place or what to call the other 5 days of the year and leap day, what to name the week days and months, or how many days     in a work-week and week-end. There are a number of scenarios that deal with these issues that will be easily applicable and readily acceptable based on our future economic, technological, and intellectual development, and of course through civil consensus once we arrive at this point in time.

DECIMAL ADVANTAGES?

 

Easier to learn and easier to work with. Uniform and constant. Instant recognition of which day in the week it is. Immediate recognition of which week of the month it is. In the case of a quarterly continuous day count it is immediately known which day or week of the quarter it is. As I said before putting aside for now the placement and names of the surplus 5 1/4 days (in both calendars), in the case of a yearly continuous 360 day count: the day of the week, month, quarter, and year; the week of the month, quarter and year; the month of the quarter and year; and the quarter of the year, are readily obvious.

Ask anyone to respond quickly without looking at a calendar to “What date of the month does next week begin on?”, “What day of the week does the first of next month fall on?”, “How many days till the first of next month?”, “What day of the week is Thursday?”, etc.

 

The typical immediate response is “boring”, “who cares?” Well I personally can find more interesting things to read other than irregular, constantly shifting calendar dates.

Except for a few the general population will care, accountants will care, scientists will care, civil and criminal courts will care, business will care, records’ and reports’ keepers will care, schools will care, vacation and transportation schedulers will care, and computers will make the transition possible just as they handled the expensive Y2K adjustment and the costly change to the ‘metric’ system in Canada and elsewhere.

 

But until then we have a few centuries more to try and reform the 7 day week calendar.

 

John Hynes has an informative Decimal Time site at www.decimaltime.org                   

 

Phil De Rosa – Linking Nature and Commonsense.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: BUT WHY DECIMAL?

Palmen, KEV (Karl)
DECIMAL WEEK - 30 DAY MONTH 7 DAY WEEK–30 DAY MONTH
Dear Phillip, Scott and Other Calendar People
 
In the context of Philip's proposed Calendar, does this week include the out-of-month days?
 
If yes, then the calendar would vary against the decimal week each quarter year, like the 7-day week does each year.
 
If no, then the week is not truly decimal. For example 4 years would normally have 1461 days but only 144 weeks.
The same applies to the 'decades' of the French Revolutionary calendar.
 
Karl
 
08(04(25 - Happy Solstice
 
-----Original Message-----
From: East Carolina University Calendar discussion List [mailto:[hidden email]]On Behalf Of Philip DeRosa
Sent: 21 June 2006 05:56
To: [hidden email]
Subject: BUT WHY DECIMAL?

Scott Colmes writes; “But why decimal?     

 

       DECIMAL WEEK - 30 DAY MONTH                           7 DAY WEEK–30 DAY MONTH

 

01   02   03   04   05   06   07   08   09   10                  01   02   03   04   05   06   07

11   12   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   20                  08   09   10   11   12   13   14

21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30                  15   16   17   18   19   20   21

                                                                                     22   23   24   25   26   27   28

                                                                                     29   30

 

01   02   03   04   05   06   07   08   09   10                                01   02   03   04   05             

11   12   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   20                  06   07   08   09   10   11   12

21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30                  13   14   15   16   17   18   19

                                                                                     20   21   22   23   24   25   26

                                                                                     27   28   29   30

 

01   02   03   04   05   06   07   08   09   10                                              01   02   03  

11   12   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   20                  04   05   06   07   08   09   10

21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30                  11   12   13   14   15   16   17

                                                                                     18   19   20   21   22   23   24

                                                                                     25   26   27   28   29   30

 

Using 30 day months this decimal calendar presupposes: a solar calendar, a few hundred years hence when the world will be ready for real calendar simplification, an affluent and educated world, input from and for civil society, and a desire to eliminate as many mundane irritants from our ever increasing stressful lives.

 

Using the clumsy Gregorian 28, 29, 30, and 31 day months makes the 7 day week look even more nonsensical. But there are several viable alternative 7 day week proposals.

 

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: BUT WHY DECIMAL?

VictorEngel
In reply to this post by Phil De Rosa
Dear Philip and Calendar People,

> This visually shows only the uniformity and simplicity of 10
> days as opposed to 7 days.

You showed us a snipped of two arrangements of calendars, but
the timespan was conveniently left to be less than a year long.
The neat arrangement quickly goes to muck at the start of the
next year.

> These could also be shown in an ISO style quarterly 90 or
> yearly 360 continuous day count.

If you reckon 360 days to a year, your calendar will drift
very rapidly through the seasons. If you're OK with that, then
why not just go all the way and use a decimal calendar? But
wait! We already effectively have that in the form of the Julian
day number.

> If one was commissioned to
> design the simplest calendar possible one would come up with
> a decimal calendar configuration. But today's world is not
> ready to accept it.  

The simplest calendar I've seen is my fortnight calendar
http://the-light.com/cal/vefortnight.htm which is simply a sequence
of days counted repeatedly for 294 days (in this presentation divided
in groups of 14 days). The day number of the start of each 294 day
sequence is the same number as at the end of the previous sequence
(on this page marked with SD for special day).

Numbers start over at 1 when they reach 364, and a new year starts
then as well. Quarter ends occur when the day number is a multiple of
91.

> If I had been a God I would have devised an exact 360 day
> tropical year or better yet a 400 day decimal year that would
> have had 100 day quarters composed of 2 subdivisions
> ('months' for lack of a better name) of five 10 day weeks
> each.

I don't know. I'm thinking that if you were a God, you would know that
such trivia is not worth bothering about and that making the world
dependent on such trivia would cause more problems than it solves.

> Alas it was not to be and we are obliged to break our
> heads over a 365.2424 day year. I also would have given the
> moon its own light source so that we would have had a bright
> full moon every night.

I would not consider that a good thing it all.
 
> This doesn't touch upon the questions of where to place or
> what to call the other 5 days of the year and leap day, what

Well, if you're serious, you better touch on these things.

Victor
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: BUT WHY DECIMAL?

Brij Bhushan Vij
In reply to this post by Palmen, KEV (Karl)
Karl, and ALL:
I placed my upgrading efforts on SEVERAL calendar formats (including the
decaday/quintoday) ideals along with *metricating Time of the Day/night*
during 1971-1973... See:
http://www.brijvij.com/synopsis-n-364d-options.doc
Relevant theme is:
(B) Metric Norms for Time Standard (1971):
10-month year to have TWO halves; each with 182 days using months named
after the Planets as they recede away from SUN, as:
First Half Year: Mercury (36 days), Venus (37 days), Earth (36 days), Mars
(37 days) and Jupiter (36 days); and
Second Half Year: Saturn (36 days), Uranus (37 days), Neptune (36 days),
Pluto (37 days) and Uranium – natural element - (36 days)
The year starts on Winter solstice 22/23 December and follow 7-day ‘Sabbath
Cycle or week’. The Face of clock could have (2x10) metric hours or  (2x12)
decimal hours, using 100 minutes x 100 seconds to the hour.
(C) Five Seasons/Decaday Calendar (1971-73): The year could be divided into
5-seasons of 73, 73, 72, 73 & 73 days and use the Decaday & Quintoday scheme
i.e. introducing THREE additional days between Thursday and Friday – named
Sigma (S-day), Alfa (a-day), and Beta (b-day). The TWO ‘quintodays’ shall
be:
First ‘quinto-day’ period:  Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday & Thursday;
and
Second ‘quinto-day’ period: Sigma (S-day), Alfa (a-day), and Beta (b-day),
Friday and Saturday.
Each day could have the distribution into 10,12,20 or 24 hours, with or
without metric/decimal sub-divisions of Time of the Day. This could mean a
‘million (106)– metric second span; using 20h x100m x100s clock’ or  ‘1.2
million – decimal seconds span; using a decimal clock to show 24h x100m
x100s decimal seconds’ during each quinto-day or 5-day time interval.
(D) Tropico-Sidereal Calendar: Using duration of the Sidereal Day, the year
could have TWO
      equal halves of 182 days followed with a World Saturday after the
first half-year (Refer: The
Tropico-Sidereal Calendar; Standards India; V6 N4; pp.110-114; 1992 July;
Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi). The remaining 1.242189669781d could
follow the 834-year span (as like for other solar calendars) using
Additional Leap Weeks, following divide by six (6) Rule and placed at:    
http://the-light.com/cal/bbv_div6.doc
The alternate adjustment of THIS period over 364-sidereal days, could use my
*div.3 option to place ONE BLWk, except during 75th-years in 128-year
cycle*, we discussed earlier.
Regards,
Brij Bhushan Vij
(Tuesday, Kali 5107-W10-02)/265+D-173 (Wednesday, 2006 June
21H10:83(decimal) ET
Aa Nau Bhadra Kritvo Yantu Vishwatah -Rg Veda
Jan:31; Feb:29; Mar:31; Apr:30; May:31; Jun:30
Jul:30; Aug:31; Sep:30; Oct:31; Nov:30; Dec:30
(365th day of Year is World Day)
******As per Kali V-GRhymeCalendaar*****
"Koi bhi cheshtha vayarth nahin hoti, purshaarth karne mein hai"
Contact # 001(201)675-8548


>From: "Palmen, KEV (Karl)" <[hidden email]>
>Reply-To: East Carolina University Calendar discussion List              
><[hidden email]>
>To: [hidden email]
>Subject: Re: BUT WHY DECIMAL?
>Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 12:39:32 +0100
>
>Dear Phillip, Scott and Other Calendar People
>
>In the context of Philip's proposed Calendar, does this week include the
>out-of-month days?
>
>If yes, then the calendar would vary against the decimal week each quarter
>year, like the 7-day week does each year.
>
>If no, then the week is not truly decimal. For example 4 years would
>normally have 1461 days but only 144 weeks.
>The same applies to the 'decades' of the French Revolutionary calendar.
>
>Karl
>
>08(04(25 - Happy Solstice
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: East Carolina University Calendar discussion List
>[mailto:[hidden email]]On Behalf Of Philip DeRosa
>Sent: 21 June 2006 05:56
>To: [hidden email]
>Subject: BUT WHY DECIMAL?
>
>
>Scott Colmes writes; "But why decimal?
>
>        DECIMAL WEEK - 30 DAY MONTH                           7 DAY WEEK-30
>DAY MONTH
>
>01   02   03   04   05   06   07   08   09   10                  01   02  
>03   04   05   06   07
>11   12   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   20                  08   09  
>10   11   12   13   14
>21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30                  15   16  
>17   18   19   20   21
>                                                                            
>           22   23   24   25   26   27   28
>                                                                            
>           29   30
>
>01   02   03   04   05   06   07   08   09   10                            
>    01   02   03   04   05
>11   12   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   20                  06   07  
>08   09   10   11   12
>21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30                  13   14  
>15   16   17   18   19
>                                                                            
>           20   21   22   23   24   25   26
>                                                                            
>           27   28   29   30
>
>01   02   03   04   05   06   07   08   09   10                            
>                  01   02   03
>11   12   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   20                  04   05  
>06   07   08   09   10
>21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30                  11   12  
>13   14   15   16   17
>                                                                            
>           18   19   20   21   22   23   24
>                                                                            
>           25   26   27   28   29   30
>
>Using 30 day months this decimal calendar presupposes: a solar calendar, a
>few hundred years hence when the world will be ready for real calendar
>simplification, an affluent and educated world, input from and for civil
>society, and a desire to eliminate as many mundane irritants from our ever
>increasing stressful lives.
>
>Using the clumsy Gregorian 28, 29, 30, and 31 day months makes the 7 day
>week look even more nonsensical. But there are several viable alternative 7
>day week proposals.
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: BUT WHY DECIMAL?

Irv Bromberg
In reply to this post by Phil De Rosa
On Jun 21, 2006, at 00:55, Philip DeRosa wrote:
> If I had been a God I would have devised an exact 360 day tropical
> year or better yet a 400 day decimal year that would have had 100 day
> quarters composed of 2 subdivisions (‘months’ for lack of a better
> name) of five 10 day weeks each.

Bromberg protests:

Such an idea is utterly futile.  In the distant past, there were in
fact 400 days in a solar year, when Earth was rotating faster.  In the
distant future, there will be 360 days in a year, when Earth is
rotating slower.  Since the Earth rotation rate more or less steadily
slows down (due mainly to lunar tides, with contributions from solar
tides and mainly short-term fluctuations from our atmosphere), there is
no point in wishing that it were fixed to some arbitrary value.  It is
much easier, and not particularly complicated, to make our calendars
conform to the astronomy of the day.

> Alas it was not to be and we are obliged to break our heads over a
> 365.2424 day year.

That is 5 hours 49 minutes 3.4 seconds in excess of 365 days, or about
3.4 seconds longer than the actual mean northward equinoctial year
length.  I'm not aware of any leap rule that uses such a calendar mean
year, although a leap day calendar with 303 leap days in 1250 years
would be exact.  Such a cycle would not have a whole number of weeks,
but 295 leap days in 1217 is very close (365.24239934264585..., only
about 1/10 second shorter than 365.2424), and does have a whole number
of weeks, compatible with a leap week calendar having 216 leap weeks
per cycle.

> I also would have given the moon its own light source so that we would
> have had a bright full moon every night.

Ahem!

Moon orbits Earth, get it?  That means that it spends half of its orbit
in the night sky, and half in the day sky.  So, even if you gave it its
own light, it would not be visible every night.  Furthermore, the extra
light that it would give overnight when it does shine in the night
would disrupt biological clocks for all kinds of creatures, interfere
with the foraging and hunting of nocturnal creatures, and in particular
disrupt the flowering timing of plants, probably leading to the
extinction of all life on Earth!

At this point we can all be very grateful that YOU are NOT GOD!

> Ask anyone to respond quickly without looking at a calendar to “What
> date of the month does next week begin on?”, “What day of the week
> does the first of next month fall on?”, “How many days till the first
> of next month?”, “What day of the week is Thursday?”, etc.

All of those questions are easy to answer with the Symmetry454
Calendar, because every day number falls on the same weekday in every
month, in every year.

-- Irv Bromberg, Toronto, Canada

<http://www.sym454.org/>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: BUT WHY DECIMAL?

Palmen, KEV (Karl)
In reply to this post by VictorEngel
Dear Victor and Calendar People

-----Original Message-----
From: East Carolina University Calendar discussion List
[mailto:[hidden email]]On Behalf Of Engel,Victor
Sent: 21 June 2006 14:54
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: BUT WHY DECIMAL?


Dear Philip and Calendar People,

> This visually shows only the uniformity and simplicity of 10
> days as opposed to 7 days.

You showed us a snipped of two arrangements of calendars, but
the timespan was conveniently left to be less than a year long.
The neat arrangement quickly goes to muck at the start of the
next year.

KARL SAYS:
It goes to muck each quarter year,
unless the out-of-month days are also out-of-week,
then the week is not truly decimal
(4 years of 1461 days would have just 144 weeks).

Karl

08(04(26
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: BUT WHY DECIMAL?

John Hynes
In reply to this post by Irv Bromberg
Irv Bromberg wrote:
>> Alas it was not to be and we are obliged to break our heads over a
>> 365.2424 day year.
>
>That is 5 hours 49 minutes 3.4 seconds in excess of 365 days, or about
>3.4 seconds longer than the actual mean northward equinoctial year
>length.  I'm not aware of any leap rule that uses such a calendar mean
>year, although a leap day calendar with 303 leap days in 1250 years
>would be exact.  Such a cycle would not have a whole number of weeks,
>but 295 leap days in 1217 is very close (365.24239934264585..., only
>about 1/10 second shorter than 365.2424), and does have a whole number
>of weeks, compatible with a leap week calendar having 216 leap weeks
>per cycle.

365.2424 has only 4 decimal places, so we cannot assume that he means exactly 365.24240, but something between 365.24235 and 365.24245.  Your figure of 365.24236 falls within that range, although I believe that the actual figure is between 365.24237 and 365.24238, the exact figure depending upon how and when you calculate it.  Anyway, given the level of precision, 365.2424 is accurate, certainly moreso than Pope Gregory's 365.2425 or the ROG's 365.2422.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: BUT WHY DECIMAL?

John Hynes
In reply to this post by Palmen, KEV (Karl)
This could be accomodated by leap-weeks, like ISO, or by intercalary months, like the Hebrew calendar.

The French calendar appends the extra days to the end of the year.  I'm not sure how that makes decades "not trully decimal".  What it means is that the decades are not continuous.  However, they are continuous from the beginning to the end of the year, just not from year to year.

By having a variable-length year, either 360/370 or 360/390, the decades would be continuous, although it is not clear to me that this would be preferable to having one defective week at yearend.

John Hynes
www.decimaltime.org
2006 June 23.879 UT


Palmen, KEV (Karl) wrote
Dear Phillip, Scott and Other Calendar People
 
In the context of Philip's proposed Calendar, does this week include the out-of-month days?
 
If yes, then the calendar would vary against the decimal week each quarter year, like the 7-day week does each year.
 
If no, then the week is not truly decimal. For example 4 years would normally have 1461 days but only 144 weeks.
The same applies to the 'decades' of the French Revolutionary calendar.
 
Karl
 
08(04(25 - Happy Solstice
 
-----Original Message-----
From: East Carolina University Calendar discussion List [mailto:CALNDR-L@LISTSERV.ECU.EDU]On Behalf Of Philip DeRosa
Sent: 21 June 2006 05:56
To: CALNDR-L@LISTSERV.ECU.EDU
Subject: BUT WHY DECIMAL?


Scott Colmes writes; "But why decimal?      
 
       DECIMAL WEEK - 30 DAY MONTH                           7 DAY WEEK-30 DAY MONTH
 
01   02   03   04   05   06   07   08   09   10                  01   02   03   04   05   06   07
11   12   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   20                  08   09   10   11   12   13   14
21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30                  15   16   17   18   19   20   21
                                                                                     22   23   24   25   26   27   28
                                                                                     29   30
 
01   02   03   04   05   06   07   08   09   10                                01   02   03   04   05            
11   12   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   20                  06   07   08   09   10   11   12
21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30                  13   14   15   16   17   18   19
                                                                                     20   21   22   23   24   25   26
                                                                                     27   28   29   30
 
01   02   03   04   05   06   07   08   09   10                                              01   02   03  
11   12   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   20                  04   05   06   07   08   09   10
21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30                  11   12   13   14   15   16   17
                                                                                     18   19   20   21   22   23   24
                                                                                     25   26   27   28   29   30
 
Using 30 day months this decimal calendar presupposes: a solar calendar, a few hundred years hence when the world will be ready for real calendar simplification, an affluent and educated world, input from and for civil society, and a desire to eliminate as many mundane irritants from our ever increasing stressful lives.
 
Using the clumsy Gregorian 28, 29, 30, and 31 day months makes the 7 day week look even more nonsensical. But there are several viable alternative 7 day week proposals.
 
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: But Why Decimal?

scott colmes
In reply to this post by Phil De Rosa
Phillip,

I think I understand now what you are saying.  Correct me if I'm wrong.  It
is something like, "Since the scientific community uses decimal units for
everything, and since we all compute most easily in decimal units, it would
be good to bring calendrical time into allignment with those--scientifc
custom, and the easy way.  Furthermore, since the Calendar we use the most
comes from a cruel and superstitious world view, it is offensive.  Whether
taking offense and making a motivating factor out of that offense is also
emotional and arbitrary, and paradoxical to boot,  is less important than
removing the offense  and switching to a rational system." More or less, so
far?

However, what I don't know is if you are claiming that counting by tens is
really easier, or it's just easier because we are used to it.  Because it
still sounds like your reasoning is a bit circular--why is counting by tens
easier?  Because that's what we use.  Why is it what we use?  Because it's
easier.

Also, your tens-fits-into-thirties justification seems a little pre-rigged.  
What's so important about thirties?  Tens fit into thirties, eights fit into
thirty-twos, sevens fit into twenty-eights.  None fit evenly into a mean
tropical year, but twenty-eight comes closest, as it happens. Maybe the most
"rational" divisions would be ones where constiuent units would be the same
number as the supra-unit count--for example, eight seasons of eight weeks of
eight days of eight day-divisions etc.  However, the numbers of days,
lunations, and years don't fit evenly and don't organize into  even square
or cubed  roots in this way, and it is counting and identifying the
repeating natural cycles that got calendars started in the first place, and
what, by and large, makes them significant information for us still.

But my main question about your imagining is that by the time people are
ready to adopt a real rational calendar, they will still be using decimal
counting (and, even hundreds of years from now, lstill iving "increasingly
stressful lives").  Maybe, but so far, at least for one immense field
(computers) , we have already shifted to a different base in counting,
(hexadecimal), and in lay daily life, too ("how many (hex) 'giga'?", etc),
whereas almost all people who really use non-Gregorian calendars use
calendars from other ancient religions or maybe one or two nationalistic
ones.  So on the basis of very limited and evanescent evidence, we could
imagine a shift away from decimal counting before people ever become
"logical" in calendar counting.

Anyways, the high twentieth century secular faith of Science-'n'-Industry
with its particular style will not reassemble in its previous configuration
and then last forever, probably.

Best Wishes,

Scott Colmes

_________________________________________________________________
FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar - get it now!
http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Brij Works Re: BUT WHY DECIMAL?

Brij Bhushan Vij
In reply to this post by John Hynes
John:
>>By having a variable-length year, either 360/370 or 360/390, the decades
>would be continuous, although it is not clear to me that this would be
>preferable to having one defective week at yearend.
You still choose to ignore my published *original contributions*; and the
discussions I have had with <[hidden email]> and Calndr-L since 2002
April. Some brief gist is placed at:
http://www.brijvij.com/synposis-n-364d-options.doc
I palced some details of my 73-decaday World Calendar between pages 106 thro
133 in my book: Towards A Unified Technology (1982); including also my
rejoinder to Raichard A Carriga,, Jr between pages 68 thro 71 on Decimal
Time published in American Scientist V66:305-13 (1978)
I also provide some material references of base works between 1971-74...and
onwards:
Metric Norms for Time Standard; Standards Engineer, Bureau of Indian
Standards; V5 N4;
1971 Oct.-Dec.; pp 58-62
First Metric Watch (News Report); The Times of India, New Delhi; 1972 August
05
AND Government of India PATENT OFFICE; Patent # 138508/72
What Metric Time Is It? Science Today, Bombay; 1971 October; pp 29 & 73
Metric Calendar Suggested (PTI News): The Times of India, New Delhi; 1974
January 2
Metric Measure of Time Mooted (PTI News Service): Indian Express, New Delhi;
1974 January 2
A Metric Calendar (PTI News): The Hindustan Times, New Delhi; 1974 January 2
Metric Time Proposed (PTI News): The Statesman, Delhi; 1974 January 3
Time To Be Measured In Metric Terms; Press Trust of India (News Feature),
New Delhi; 1974 January 5

Brij Bhushan Vij
(Saturday, Kali 5107-W10-06)/265+D-177 (Sunday, 2006 June 25H12:71(decimal)
ET
Aa Nau Bhadra Kritvo Yantu Vishwatah -Rg Veda
Jan:31; Feb:29; Mar:31; Apr:30; May:31; Jun:30
Jul:30; Aug:31; Sep:30; Oct:31; Nov:30; Dec:30
(365th day of Year is World Day)
******As per Kali V-GRhymeCalendaar*****
"Koi bhi cheshtha vayarth nahin hoti, purshaarth karne mein hai"
Contact # 001(201)675-8548


>From: John Hynes <[hidden email]>
>Reply-To: East Carolina University Calendar discussion List              
><[hidden email]>
>To: [hidden email]
>Subject: Re: BUT WHY DECIMAL?
>Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 14:06:20 -0700
>
>This could be accomodated by leap-weeks, like ISO, or by intercalary
>months,
>like the Hebrew calendar.
>
>The French calendar appends the extra days to the end of the year.  I'm not
>sure how that makes decades "not trully decimal".  What it means is that
>the
>decades are not continuous.  However, they are continuous from the
>beginning
>to the end of the year, just not from year to year.
>
>By having a variable-length year, either 360/370 or 360/390, the decades
>would be continuous, although it is not clear to me that this would be
>preferable to having one defective week at yearend.
>
>John Hynes
>www.decimaltime.org
>2006 June 23.879 UT
>
>
>
>Palmen, KEV (Karl) wrote:
> >
> > Dear Phillip, Scott and Other Calendar People
> >
> > In the context of Philip's proposed Calendar, does this week include the
> > out-of-month days?
> >
> > If yes, then the calendar would vary against the decimal week each
>quarter
> > year, like the 7-day week does each year.
> >
> > If no, then the week is not truly decimal. For example 4 years would
> > normally have 1461 days but only 144 weeks.
> > The same applies to the 'decades' of the French Revolutionary calendar.
> >
> > Karl
> >
> > 08(04(25 - Happy Solstice
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: East Carolina University Calendar discussion List
> > [mailto:[hidden email]]On Behalf Of Philip DeRosa
> > Sent: 21 June 2006 05:56
> > To: [hidden email]
> > Subject: BUT WHY DECIMAL?
> >
> >
> > Scott Colmes writes; "But why decimal?
> >
> >        DECIMAL WEEK - 30 DAY MONTH                           7 DAY
>WEEK-30
> > DAY MONTH
> >
> > 01   02   03   04   05   06   07   08   09   10                  01   02
> > 03   04   05   06   07
> > 11   12   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   20                  08   09
> > 10   11   12   13   14
> > 21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30                  15   16
> > 17   18   19   20   21
> >
> > 22   23   24   25   26   27   28
> >
> > 29   30
> >
> > 01   02   03   04   05   06   07   08   09   10
> > 01   02   03   04   05
> > 11   12   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   20                  06   07
> > 08   09   10   11   12
> > 21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30                  13   14
> > 15   16   17   18   19
> >
> > 20   21   22   23   24   25   26
> >
> > 27   28   29   30
> >
> > 01   02   03   04   05   06   07   08   09   10
> > 01   02   03
> > 11   12   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   20                  04   05
> > 06   07   08   09   10
> > 21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30                  11   12
> > 13   14   15   16   17
> >
> > 18   19   20   21   22   23   24
> >
> > 25   26   27   28   29   30
> >
> > Using 30 day months this decimal calendar presupposes: a solar calendar,
>a
> > few hundred years hence when the world will be ready for real calendar
> > simplification, an affluent and educated world, input from and for civil
> > society, and a desire to eliminate as many mundane irritants from our
>ever
> > increasing stressful lives.
> >
> > Using the clumsy Gregorian 28, 29, 30, and 31 day months makes the 7 day
> > week look even more nonsensical. But there are several viable
>alternative
> > 7 day week proposals.
> >
> >
> >
>--
>View this message in context:
>http://www.nabble.com/BUT-WHY-DECIMAL--t1821842.html#a5019116
>Sent from the Calndr-L forum at Nabble.com.