Dear Brij and Calendar People A quick reply before I go away for a week. From: East Carolina
University Calendar discussion List [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of
Brij Bhushan metric VIJ Sirs: Karl has a reason to question my , 'competence' to Reform the current format of the Gregorian calendar with minimal change(s) per my demonstrated/discussed calculations:
http://www.brijvij.com/ KARL REPLIES: YES and also the ‘competence’ to estimate the cost of such reforms. Even a small change is costly and will give less value for money. This brings me back to my 'original & base contribution'  The Metric Second (1973), wherein also I provided concerns like  the grad (calling this a quadrant of 100 degrees metric) linked to the new time interval: The Metric Second i.e.
the metric day having 20x100x100=200000 units, via the duration linked to 'tropical year'. KAEL REPLIES: The Metric second would be the most expensive part of Brij’s reform, if it were to replace the second, because so many SI units depend on it. If it were instead to supplement the second, it would
be wise to give it a different name. My approach to the Nautical Kilometre, had . also been pointed. Obviously, the Nautical Mile worked to 1852 'metre'! As far as the "Decimalsatiin of Time of the HOUR", I do not see the difficulty expressed in considering the equation of 25 divisions (Decimal minutes/seconds) = 15 divisions (minutes/seconds) in each QUDRANT of 90* and/or 100 grad; for
which conversion does not need a 'super calculator'
KARL REPLIES: It is not the quadrant of 90 degrees or 100 grad that matters here, but the third of a quadrant = 30 degrees or 33 1/3 grad that does matter. It is these divisions that are numbered on a clock face.  just mental calculations would bridge: MULTIPLY by 5 & DIVIDE by 3;
KARL REPLIES: This is conversion of minutes to Brij’s decimal minutes. The DIVIDE by 3 is not easy to do and would be a considerable burden, which could negate the benefits of decimalisation, whose purpose includes
removal of the need to multiply or divide by numbers such as 3. Also I stated from the hour numbers one has to MULTIPLY by 5 to get the number of minutes: e.g. if the minute hand is by the 4, it indicates 4*5=20 minutes past the hour.
To get the Brij’s decimal minutes one would have to MULTIPLY by 5 TWICE & DIVIDE by 3, which is equivalent to MULTIPLY by 8 1/3 as I have stated:
e.g. if the minute hand is by the 4, it would be 4*(8 1/3) = 100/3 = 33 1/3 of Brij’s decimal minutes past the hour. would suffice without changing the face of "clocks/horological instruments", is my view. Horology instruments only need 100 additional graduations along with present 60 graduations (markings for minutes/seconds). KARL REPLIES: Adding the 100 additional gradations to an existing clock could be more expensive than making a new clock. NEVER has man ever suggested such 'simplicity' to arrive/achieve Decimalisation for TIME of the HOUR, when linked to HOURAngle of 15x24=360degree circle I.e. As the Earth spins in its axis for determination of Local Time, at ZERO cost
'mentally' by a child of STANDRD Five upwards! Where is he difficulty, I wonder? Whatever happened to French Republican calendar, now, is history! My regards, sir(s) Brij B. VIJ ([hidden email]) Tuesday, 2016 August 23H09:56(decimal) Karl 15(15(22

Free forum by Nabble  Edit this page 