Karl said: "The main reason I like months of 4 or 5 weeks for a leap

week calendar [is that] a leap week can be accommodated in such a month

system."

Months in the Gregorian Calendar are a misnomer, since they have no

connection with Moon cycles. Who needs months? Only those (almost

everyone) who can't imagine anything different from our present system

of time periods.

I define an "integral-week calendar" as a calendar in which the (solar)

years always have an integral number of weeks, where 'weeks' consist of

a certain fixed number of days, not necessarily seven. In an

integral-week calendar all days are part of some week.

In 2001 I invented two such calendars (defined at

https://www.hermetic.ch/cal_stud/sdwc/sdwc.htm ) one based on a week of

5 days and one based on a week of 6 days.

The Integral Five-Day Week Calendar is a leap week calendar in that a

'normal' year has 73 5-day weeks, and a 'long' year has 74 5-day weeks.

Thus the number of days in a calendar year is 365 for normal years and

370 for long years.

The Integral Six-Day Week Calendar, is not a leap week calendar, since

a 'normal' year has 61 6-day weeks, and a 'short' year has 60 6-day

weeks. Thus the number of days in a calendar year is 366 for normal

years and 360 for short years.

In both of these calendars (due to how 'long' and 'short' years are

defined) the average length of the calendar year is exactly equal to

the vernal equinox year, that is, 365.2424 mean solar days.

Each of these integral-week calendars can conveniently be divided into

quarters, in one case of 18 or 19 weeks, and in the other of 15 or 16

weeks.

The Integral Six-Day Week Calendar is more versatile in that the normal

and short years may be divided into halves, thirds, quarters, fifths,

sixths, tenths, fiftheenths, twentieths and thirtieths.

Only complete mental lethargy and total lack of imagination on the part

of almost all humans on this planet prevents either of these calendars

from being considered seriously as a replacement for the archaic

Gregorian Calendar. And, of course, the cost and inconvenience of such

a replacement.

Regards,

Peter Meyer