Week & Month Month start differences from Gregorian

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

Week & Month Month start differences from Gregorian

k.palmen@btinternet.com
Dear Calendar People

Irv has kindly calculated the number of Week & Months calendar months that start a certain number of days different from the corresponding Gregorian Month. The figures would also apply to Symmetry454 months, if the ISO week date years were used.

The first column is the number of days the Week & Month calendar month begins before the corresponding Gregorian month, which is also the number of days the Gregorian month begins after the corresponding Week & Month calendar month.

The second column is the number of months in a 400-year cycle of 4800 months that have the difference specified in the first column.

The third column is the approximate percentage of such months.

-7 43 0.90%  (March 7 days out)
-6 101 2.10%
-5 200 4.17%
-4 316 6.58%
-3 444 9.25%
-2 499 10.40%
-1 560 11.67%
 0 628 13.08%
+1 586 12.21%
+2 485 10.10%
+3 369 7.69%
+4 243 5.06%
+5 185 3.85%
+6 128 2.67%
+7 13 0.27% (November 7 days out)

Just 1229 out of 4800 months (25.60%) are more than 3 days out.
 
Karl

Monday Beta January 2019
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Week & Month Month start differences from Gregorian

Michael Ossipoff
I'd say a week is a lot, especially when compared to Hanke-Henry.

If the a Hanke-Henry year and a Roman-Gregorian year start on the same day, then Hanke-Henry's months' starting days never differs from those of the Roman months by more than 1 day.  Hanke-Henry's months' average difference in that regard is 2/3 of a day.

With 28,35,28 quarters, starting on the same day as the Roman months, March starts 4 days later than Roman March.   ...and the average difference in month-start, from the Roman months, is 1.83 days.

Hanke-Henry's year-start day never differs from that of Roman-Gregorian by more than 3 days.  That can't be said for calendars with other year-start rules. In fact, it seems to me, Karl said that his leapyear-rule has a peak-to-peak jitter-amplitude of 2 weeks.

Either you want to imitate Roman-Gregorian or you don't. Hanke-Henry does, and its dates are seaonally-meaningful, given our 2000-year familiarity with the seasonal meanings of the Roman months. 

That can't be said for 28,35,28.    ...which is why I've asked Karl what the 28,35,28 months are supposed to mean, and what is accomplished by naming them after the Roman months and starting the year near the Roman-Gregorian year-start day.

6-Seasons  -3 wk Offset makes no attempt to imitate Roman Gregorian. In the version that I prefer, 6-Seasons  -3 wk Offset doesn't have months. In the version that has months, those months have no resemblance to the Roman months, nor are they intended to.

By the way, 6-Seasons  -3 wk Offset divides neatly into quarters.  Nominal North and South are each a quarter-year.  Nominal Pre-Northward and Northward add up to a quarter-year.

...for anyone who considers neat division into quarters important.

Today is Late-South Week3  Friday.   We're in the 3rd week of the 10-week Late-South--the colder part of winter in north temperate climates.  In other words, that date explicitly says that we're about 1/3 of the way through the more extreme part of Winter.

Late-South  Week3  Friday (6-Seasons -3 wk Offset)
2019-03-5  (South-Solstice WeekDate)

Michael Ossipoff



On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 5:34 AM K PALMEN <[hidden email]> wrote:
Dear Calendar People

Irv has kindly calculated the number of Week & Months calendar months that start a certain number of days different from the corresponding Gregorian Month. The figures would also apply to Symmetry454 months, if the ISO week date years were used.

The first column is the number of days the Week & Month calendar month begins before the corresponding Gregorian month, which is also the number of days the Gregorian month begins after the corresponding Week & Month calendar month.

The second column is the number of months in a 400-year cycle of 4800 months that have the difference specified in the first column.

The third column is the approximate percentage of such months.

-7 43 0.90%  (March 7 days out)
-6 101 2.10%
-5 200 4.17%
-4 316 6.58%
-3 444 9.25%
-2 499 10.40%
-1 560 11.67%
 0 628 13.08%
+1 586 12.21%
+2 485 10.10%
+3 369 7.69%
+4 243 5.06%
+5 185 3.85%
+6 128 2.67%
+7 13 0.27% (November 7 days out)

Just 1229 out of 4800 months (25.60%) are more than 3 days out.
 
Karl

Monday Beta January 2019
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Week & Month Month start differences from Gregorian

k.palmen@btinternet.com
Dear Michael and Calendar People

I chose the Julian-Gregorian month names for the months in the week and month calendar, because it saves the user from having to learn new month names and every month begins within 7 days of the Gregorian month of the same name so indicate within a week the same season. Nearly 3/4 of months start within 3 days of their Gregorian namesake. So they have approximately the same meaning as their Gregorian namesakes.

The months differ radically in their internal structure and are of a form that Michael has found convenient.

This difference makes the dates different, so they cannot be confused with Gregorian dates and so there is no need to give the months different names like what Walter has suggested.

The Hanke-Henry months start within 5 days of the Gregorian namesake as shown at
http://hankehenryontime.com/html/qanda.html 

Karl

Saturday Beta January 2019
----Original message----
From : [hidden email]
Date : 11/01/2019 - 14:53 (GMT)
To : [hidden email]
Subject : Re: Week & Month Month start differences from Gregorian

I'd say a week is a lot, especially when compared to Hanke-Henry.

If the a Hanke-Henry year and a Roman-Gregorian year start on the same day, then Hanke-Henry's months' starting days never differs from those of the Roman months by more than 1 day.  Hanke-Henry's months' average difference in that regard is 2/3 of a day.

With 28,35,28 quarters, starting on the same day as the Roman months, March starts 4 days later than Roman March.   ...and the average difference in month-start, from the Roman months, is 1.83 days.

Hanke-Henry's year-start day never differs from that of Roman-Gregorian by more than 3 days.  That can't be said for calendars with other year-start rules. In fact, it seems to me, Karl said that his leapyear-rule has a peak-to-peak jitter-amplitude of 2 weeks.

Either you want to imitate Roman-Gregorian or you don't. Hanke-Henry does, and its dates are seaonally-meaningful, given our 2000-year familiarity with the seasonal meanings of the Roman months. 

That can't be said for 28,35,28.    ...which is why I've asked Karl what the 28,35,28 months are supposed to mean, and what is accomplished by naming them after the Roman months and starting the year near the Roman-Gregorian year-start day.

6-Seasons  -3 wk Offset makes no attempt to imitate Roman Gregorian. In the version that I prefer, 6-Seasons  -3 wk Offset doesn't have months. In the version that has months, those months have no resemblance to the Roman months, nor are they intended to.

By the way, 6-Seasons  -3 wk Offset divides neatly into quarters.  Nominal North and South are each a quarter-year.  Nominal Pre-Northward and Northward add up to a quarter-year.

...for anyone who considers neat division into quarters important.

Today is Late-South Week3  Friday.   We're in the 3rd week of the 10-week Late-South--the colder part of winter in north temperate climates.  In other words, that date explicitly says that we're about 1/3 of the way through the more extreme part of Winter.

Late-South  Week3  Friday (6-Seasons -3 wk Offset)
2019-03-5  (South-Solstice WeekDate)

Michael Ossipoff



On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 5:34 AM K PALMEN <[hidden email]> wrote:
Dear Calendar People

Irv has kindly calculated the number of Week & Months calendar months that start a certain number of days different from the corresponding Gregorian Month. The figures would also apply to Symmetry454 months, if the ISO week date years were used.

The first column is the number of days the Week & Month calendar month begins before the corresponding Gregorian month, which is also the number of days the Gregorian month begins after the corresponding Week & Month calendar month.

The second column is the number of months in a 400-year cycle of 4800 months that have the difference specified in the first column.

The third column is the approximate percentage of such months.

-7 43 0.90%  (March 7 days out)
-6 101 2.10%
-5 200 4.17%
-4 316 6.58%
-3 444 9.25%
-2 499 10.40%
-1 560 11.67%
 0 628 13.08%
+1 586 12.21%
+2 485 10.10%
+3 369 7.69%
+4 243 5.06%
+5 185 3.85%
+6 128 2.67%
+7 13 0.27% (November 7 days out)

Just 1229 out of 4800 months (25.60%) are more than 3 days out.
 
Karl

Monday Beta January 2019


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Week & Month Month start differences from Gregorian

Michael Ossipoff


On Sat, Jan 12, 2019 at 6:36 AM K PALMEN <[hidden email]> wrote:
Dear Michael and Calendar People

I chose the Julian-Gregorian month names for the months in the week and month calendar, because it saves the user from having to learn new month names

Then it's just a difference in calendar purposes, because 6-Seasons  -3 wk Offset and South-Solstice WeekDate are proposed for a hypothetical future time when people want a complete departure from how things were done in the bad-old-days....a (probably never-to-be time that I call a "Utopian Epoch").

And this is just an individual subjective judgment, but the choices that appeal to me are either the greater convenience and payment-period uniformity of 28X13, or the duration-calculating and payment-period convenience (using multiples of 4 wk) of WeekDate, vs the really Roman-close Hanke-Henry.


The months differ radically in their internal structure and are of a form that Michael has found convenient.

Yes, all 3 of my proposed calendars that have more year-divisions than just the week, name a month's dates by week & day-of-week.

I now propose 4 calendars, all of which use the same year-start rule: 

South-Solstice WeekDate
28X30 with South-Solstice Nearest-Monday year-start
6-Seasons  -3 wk Offset
6-Seasons  0 Offset

I realize that South-Solstice WeekDate isn't a new proposal, but my version has what I consider the best year-start rule.

 



The Hanke-Henry months start within 5 days of the Gregorian namesake

Alright, but I was only referring to common-years. 

When Hanke-Henry and Roman-Gregorian start their calendar year on the same day, Hanke-Henry's date will never differ from Roman-Gregorian's date by more than 1 day.

And Hanke-Henry's year-start day never differs from that of Roman-Gregorian by more than 3 days.

So, doesn't that mean that (when Hanke-Henry and Roman-Gregorian both are in a common-year) Hanke-Henry's date will never differ from that of Roman-Gregorian by more than 4 days?

2019-W03-6  (South-Solstice WeekDate)
Late-South  Week3  Saturday  (6-Seasons  -3 wk Offset)
South  Week3  Saturday (6-Seasons  0 Offset)
Month 1  Week3  Saturday  (28X13 with South-Solstice Nearest-Monday year-start)
December 12th  (Roman-Gregorian)
December 13th  (Hanke-Henry)
2019-W02-6   (ISO WeekDate)
22 Nivose CCXXVII  (French-Republican)


Karl

Saturday Beta January 2019
----Original message----
From : [hidden email]
Date : 11/01/2019 - 14:53 (GMT)
To : [hidden email]
Subject : Re: Week & Month Month start differences from Gregorian

I'd say a week is a lot, especially when compared to Hanke-Henry.

If the a Hanke-Henry year and a Roman-Gregorian year start on the same day, then Hanke-Henry's months' starting days never differs from those of the Roman months by more than 1 day.  Hanke-Henry's months' average difference in that regard is 2/3 of a day.

With 28,35,28 quarters, starting on the same day as the Roman months, March starts 4 days later than Roman March.   ...and the average difference in month-start, from the Roman months, is 1.83 days.

Hanke-Henry's year-start day never differs from that of Roman-Gregorian by more than 3 days.  That can't be said for calendars with other year-start rules. In fact, it seems to me, Karl said that his leapyear-rule has a peak-to-peak jitter-amplitude of 2 weeks.

Either you want to imitate Roman-Gregorian or you don't. Hanke-Henry does, and its dates are seaonally-meaningful, given our 2000-year familiarity with the seasonal meanings of the Roman months. 

That can't be said for 28,35,28.    ...which is why I've asked Karl what the 28,35,28 months are supposed to mean, and what is accomplished by naming them after the Roman months and starting the year near the Roman-Gregorian year-start day.

6-Seasons  -3 wk Offset makes no attempt to imitate Roman Gregorian. In the version that I prefer, 6-Seasons  -3 wk Offset doesn't have months. In the version that has months, those months have no resemblance to the Roman months, nor are they intended to.

By the way, 6-Seasons  -3 wk Offset divides neatly into quarters.  Nominal North and South are each a quarter-year.  Nominal Pre-Northward and Northward add up to a quarter-year.

...for anyone who considers neat division into quarters important.

Today is Late-South Week3  Friday.   We're in the 3rd week of the 10-week Late-South--the colder part of winter in north temperate climates.  In other words, that date explicitly says that we're about 1/3 of the way through the more extreme part of Winter.

Late-South  Week3  Friday (6-Seasons -3 wk Offset)
2019-03-5  (South-Solstice WeekDate)

Michael Ossipoff



On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 5:34 AM K PALMEN <[hidden email]> wrote:
Dear Calendar People

Irv has kindly calculated the number of Week & Months calendar months that start a certain number of days different from the corresponding Gregorian Month. The figures would also apply to Symmetry454 months, if the ISO week date years were used.

The first column is the number of days the Week & Month calendar month begins before the corresponding Gregorian month, which is also the number of days the Gregorian month begins after the corresponding Week & Month calendar month.

The second column is the number of months in a 400-year cycle of 4800 months that have the difference specified in the first column.

The third column is the approximate percentage of such months.

-7 43 0.90%  (March 7 days out)
-6 101 2.10%
-5 200 4.17%
-4 316 6.58%
-3 444 9.25%
-2 499 10.40%
-1 560 11.67%
 0 628 13.08%
+1 586 12.21%
+2 485 10.10%
+3 369 7.69%
+4 243 5.06%
+5 185 3.85%
+6 128 2.67%
+7 13 0.27% (November 7 days out)

Just 1229 out of 4800 months (25.60%) are more than 3 days out.
 
Karl

Monday Beta January 2019


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Week & Month Month start differences from Gregorian

Michael Ossipoff

Typo:

I said:

28X30 with South-Solstice Nearest-Monday year-start

I meant 28X13 with (arithmetical) South-Solstice Nearest-Monday year-start

Michael Ossipoff

On Sat, Jan 12, 2019 at 11:54 AM Michael Ossipoff <[hidden email]> wrote:


On Sat, Jan 12, 2019 at 6:36 AM K PALMEN <[hidden email]> wrote:
Dear Michael and Calendar People

I chose the Julian-Gregorian month names for the months in the week and month calendar, because it saves the user from having to learn new month names

Then it's just a difference in calendar purposes, because 6-Seasons  -3 wk Offset and South-Solstice WeekDate are proposed for a hypothetical future time when people want a complete departure from how things were done in the bad-old-days....a (probably never-to-be time that I call a "Utopian Epoch").

And this is just an individual subjective judgment, but the choices that appeal to me are either the greater convenience and payment-period uniformity of 28X13, or the duration-calculating and payment-period convenience (using multiples of 4 wk) of WeekDate, vs the really Roman-close Hanke-Henry.


The months differ radically in their internal structure and are of a form that Michael has found convenient.

Yes, all 3 of my proposed calendars that have more year-divisions than just the week, name a month's dates by week & day-of-week.

I now propose 4 calendars, all of which use the same year-start rule: 

South-Solstice WeekDate
28X30 with South-Solstice Nearest-Monday year-start
6-Seasons  -3 wk Offset
6-Seasons  0 Offset

I realize that South-Solstice WeekDate isn't a new proposal, but my version has what I consider the best year-start rule.

 



The Hanke-Henry months start within 5 days of the Gregorian namesake

Alright, but I was only referring to common-years. 

When Hanke-Henry and Roman-Gregorian start their calendar year on the same day, Hanke-Henry's date will never differ from Roman-Gregorian's date by more than 1 day.

And Hanke-Henry's year-start day never differs from that of Roman-Gregorian by more than 3 days.

So, doesn't that mean that (when Hanke-Henry and Roman-Gregorian both are in a common-year) Hanke-Henry's date will never differ from that of Roman-Gregorian by more than 4 days?

2019-W03-6  (South-Solstice WeekDate)
Late-South  Week3  Saturday  (6-Seasons  -3 wk Offset)
South  Week3  Saturday (6-Seasons  0 Offset)
Month 1  Week3  Saturday  (28X13 with South-Solstice Nearest-Monday year-start)
December 12th  (Roman-Gregorian)
December 13th  (Hanke-Henry)
2019-W02-6   (ISO WeekDate)
22 Nivose CCXXVII  (French-Republican)


Karl

Saturday Beta January 2019
----Original message----
From : [hidden email]
Date : 11/01/2019 - 14:53 (GMT)
To : [hidden email]
Subject : Re: Week & Month Month start differences from Gregorian

I'd say a week is a lot, especially when compared to Hanke-Henry.

If the a Hanke-Henry year and a Roman-Gregorian year start on the same day, then Hanke-Henry's months' starting days never differs from those of the Roman months by more than 1 day.  Hanke-Henry's months' average difference in that regard is 2/3 of a day.

With 28,35,28 quarters, starting on the same day as the Roman months, March starts 4 days later than Roman March.   ...and the average difference in month-start, from the Roman months, is 1.83 days.

Hanke-Henry's year-start day never differs from that of Roman-Gregorian by more than 3 days.  That can't be said for calendars with other year-start rules. In fact, it seems to me, Karl said that his leapyear-rule has a peak-to-peak jitter-amplitude of 2 weeks.

Either you want to imitate Roman-Gregorian or you don't. Hanke-Henry does, and its dates are seaonally-meaningful, given our 2000-year familiarity with the seasonal meanings of the Roman months. 

That can't be said for 28,35,28.    ...which is why I've asked Karl what the 28,35,28 months are supposed to mean, and what is accomplished by naming them after the Roman months and starting the year near the Roman-Gregorian year-start day.

6-Seasons  -3 wk Offset makes no attempt to imitate Roman Gregorian. In the version that I prefer, 6-Seasons  -3 wk Offset doesn't have months. In the version that has months, those months have no resemblance to the Roman months, nor are they intended to.

By the way, 6-Seasons  -3 wk Offset divides neatly into quarters.  Nominal North and South are each a quarter-year.  Nominal Pre-Northward and Northward add up to a quarter-year.

...for anyone who considers neat division into quarters important.

Today is Late-South Week3  Friday.   We're in the 3rd week of the 10-week Late-South--the colder part of winter in north temperate climates.  In other words, that date explicitly says that we're about 1/3 of the way through the more extreme part of Winter.

Late-South  Week3  Friday (6-Seasons -3 wk Offset)
2019-03-5  (South-Solstice WeekDate)

Michael Ossipoff



On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 5:34 AM K PALMEN <[hidden email]> wrote:
Dear Calendar People

Irv has kindly calculated the number of Week & Months calendar months that start a certain number of days different from the corresponding Gregorian Month. The figures would also apply to Symmetry454 months, if the ISO week date years were used.

The first column is the number of days the Week & Month calendar month begins before the corresponding Gregorian month, which is also the number of days the Gregorian month begins after the corresponding Week & Month calendar month.

The second column is the number of months in a 400-year cycle of 4800 months that have the difference specified in the first column.

The third column is the approximate percentage of such months.

-7 43 0.90%  (March 7 days out)
-6 101 2.10%
-5 200 4.17%
-4 316 6.58%
-3 444 9.25%
-2 499 10.40%
-1 560 11.67%
 0 628 13.08%
+1 586 12.21%
+2 485 10.10%
+3 369 7.69%
+4 243 5.06%
+5 185 3.85%
+6 128 2.67%
+7 13 0.27% (November 7 days out)

Just 1229 out of 4800 months (25.60%) are more than 3 days out.
 
Karl

Monday Beta January 2019


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Week & Month Month start differences from Gregorian

Michael Ossipoff
Typo:

For Roman-Gregorian and Hanke-Henry, I said "December" (out of habit), when I meant "January".  Lots of people frequently do that.

Michael Ossipoff

On Sat, Jan 12, 2019 at 12:06 PM Michael Ossipoff <[hidden email]> wrote:

Typo:

I said:

28X30 with South-Solstice Nearest-Monday year-start

I meant 28X13 with (arithmetical) South-Solstice Nearest-Monday year-start

Michael Ossipoff

On Sat, Jan 12, 2019 at 11:54 AM Michael Ossipoff <[hidden email]> wrote:


On Sat, Jan 12, 2019 at 6:36 AM K PALMEN <[hidden email]> wrote:
Dear Michael and Calendar People

I chose the Julian-Gregorian month names for the months in the week and month calendar, because it saves the user from having to learn new month names

Then it's just a difference in calendar purposes, because 6-Seasons  -3 wk Offset and South-Solstice WeekDate are proposed for a hypothetical future time when people want a complete departure from how things were done in the bad-old-days....a (probably never-to-be time that I call a "Utopian Epoch").

And this is just an individual subjective judgment, but the choices that appeal to me are either the greater convenience and payment-period uniformity of 28X13, or the duration-calculating and payment-period convenience (using multiples of 4 wk) of WeekDate, vs the really Roman-close Hanke-Henry.


The months differ radically in their internal structure and are of a form that Michael has found convenient.

Yes, all 3 of my proposed calendars that have more year-divisions than just the week, name a month's dates by week & day-of-week.

I now propose 4 calendars, all of which use the same year-start rule: 

South-Solstice WeekDate
28X30 with South-Solstice Nearest-Monday year-start
6-Seasons  -3 wk Offset
6-Seasons  0 Offset

I realize that South-Solstice WeekDate isn't a new proposal, but my version has what I consider the best year-start rule.

 



The Hanke-Henry months start within 5 days of the Gregorian namesake

Alright, but I was only referring to common-years. 

When Hanke-Henry and Roman-Gregorian start their calendar year on the same day, Hanke-Henry's date will never differ from Roman-Gregorian's date by more than 1 day.

And Hanke-Henry's year-start day never differs from that of Roman-Gregorian by more than 3 days.

So, doesn't that mean that (when Hanke-Henry and Roman-Gregorian both are in a common-year) Hanke-Henry's date will never differ from that of Roman-Gregorian by more than 4 days?

2019-W03-6  (South-Solstice WeekDate)
Late-South  Week3  Saturday  (6-Seasons  -3 wk Offset)
South  Week3  Saturday (6-Seasons  0 Offset)
Month 1  Week3  Saturday  (28X13 with South-Solstice Nearest-Monday year-start)
December 12th  (Roman-Gregorian)
December 13th  (Hanke-Henry)
2019-W02-6   (ISO WeekDate)
22 Nivose CCXXVII  (French-Republican)


Karl

Saturday Beta January 2019
----Original message----
From : [hidden email]
Date : 11/01/2019 - 14:53 (GMT)
To : [hidden email]
Subject : Re: Week & Month Month start differences from Gregorian

I'd say a week is a lot, especially when compared to Hanke-Henry.

If the a Hanke-Henry year and a Roman-Gregorian year start on the same day, then Hanke-Henry's months' starting days never differs from those of the Roman months by more than 1 day.  Hanke-Henry's months' average difference in that regard is 2/3 of a day.

With 28,35,28 quarters, starting on the same day as the Roman months, March starts 4 days later than Roman March.   ...and the average difference in month-start, from the Roman months, is 1.83 days.

Hanke-Henry's year-start day never differs from that of Roman-Gregorian by more than 3 days.  That can't be said for calendars with other year-start rules. In fact, it seems to me, Karl said that his leapyear-rule has a peak-to-peak jitter-amplitude of 2 weeks.

Either you want to imitate Roman-Gregorian or you don't. Hanke-Henry does, and its dates are seaonally-meaningful, given our 2000-year familiarity with the seasonal meanings of the Roman months. 

That can't be said for 28,35,28.    ...which is why I've asked Karl what the 28,35,28 months are supposed to mean, and what is accomplished by naming them after the Roman months and starting the year near the Roman-Gregorian year-start day.

6-Seasons  -3 wk Offset makes no attempt to imitate Roman Gregorian. In the version that I prefer, 6-Seasons  -3 wk Offset doesn't have months. In the version that has months, those months have no resemblance to the Roman months, nor are they intended to.

By the way, 6-Seasons  -3 wk Offset divides neatly into quarters.  Nominal North and South are each a quarter-year.  Nominal Pre-Northward and Northward add up to a quarter-year.

...for anyone who considers neat division into quarters important.

Today is Late-South Week3  Friday.   We're in the 3rd week of the 10-week Late-South--the colder part of winter in north temperate climates.  In other words, that date explicitly says that we're about 1/3 of the way through the more extreme part of Winter.

Late-South  Week3  Friday (6-Seasons -3 wk Offset)
2019-03-5  (South-Solstice WeekDate)

Michael Ossipoff



On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 5:34 AM K PALMEN <[hidden email]> wrote:
Dear Calendar People

Irv has kindly calculated the number of Week & Months calendar months that start a certain number of days different from the corresponding Gregorian Month. The figures would also apply to Symmetry454 months, if the ISO week date years were used.

The first column is the number of days the Week & Month calendar month begins before the corresponding Gregorian month, which is also the number of days the Gregorian month begins after the corresponding Week & Month calendar month.

The second column is the number of months in a 400-year cycle of 4800 months that have the difference specified in the first column.

The third column is the approximate percentage of such months.

-7 43 0.90%  (March 7 days out)
-6 101 2.10%
-5 200 4.17%
-4 316 6.58%
-3 444 9.25%
-2 499 10.40%
-1 560 11.67%
 0 628 13.08%
+1 586 12.21%
+2 485 10.10%
+3 369 7.69%
+4 243 5.06%
+5 185 3.85%
+6 128 2.67%
+7 13 0.27% (November 7 days out)

Just 1229 out of 4800 months (25.60%) are more than 3 days out.
 
Karl

Monday Beta January 2019


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Week & Month Month start differences from Gregorian

k.palmen@btinternet.com
In reply to this post by Michael Ossipoff
Dear Michael and Calendar People

I don't care about Michael's opinions about seasons and solar calendars.

Karl

Sunday Beta January 2019
----Original message----
From : [hidden email]
Date : 12/01/2019 - 16:54 (GMT)
To : [hidden email]
Subject : Re: Week & Month Month start differences from Gregorian



On Sat, Jan 12, 2019 at 6:36 AM K PALMEN <[hidden email]> wrote:
Dear Michael and Calendar People

I chose the Julian-Gregorian month names for the months in the week and month calendar, because it saves the user from having to learn new month names

Then it's just a difference in calendar purposes, because 6-Seasons  -3 wk Offset and South-Solstice WeekDate are proposed for a hypothetical future time when people want a complete departure from how things were done in the bad-old-days....a (probably never-to-be time that I call a "Utopian Epoch").

And this is just an individual subjective judgment, but the choices that appeal to me are either the greater convenience and payment-period uniformity of 28X13, or the duration-calculating and payment-period convenience (using multiples of 4 wk) of WeekDate, vs the really Roman-close Hanke-Henry.


The months differ radically in their internal structure and are of a form that Michael has found convenient.

Yes, all 3 of my proposed calendars that have more year-divisions than just the week, name a month's dates by week & day-of-week.

I now propose 4 calendars, all of which use the same year-start rule: 

South-Solstice WeekDate
28X30 with South-Solstice Nearest-Monday year-start
6-Seasons  -3 wk Offset
6-Seasons  0 Offset

I realize that South-Solstice WeekDate isn't a new proposal, but my version has what I consider the best year-start rule.

 



The Hanke-Henry months start within 5 days of the Gregorian namesake

Alright, but I was only referring to common-years. 

When Hanke-Henry and Roman-Gregorian start their calendar year on the same day, Hanke-Henry's date will never differ from Roman-Gregorian's date by more than 1 day.

And Hanke-Henry's year-start day never differs from that of Roman-Gregorian by more than 3 days.

So, doesn't that mean that (when Hanke-Henry and Roman-Gregorian both are in a common-year) Hanke-Henry's date will never differ from that of Roman-Gregorian by more than 4 days?

2019-W03-6  (South-Solstice WeekDate)
Late-South  Week3  Saturday  (6-Seasons  -3 wk Offset)
South  Week3  Saturday (6-Seasons  0 Offset)
Month 1  Week3  Saturday  (28X13 with South-Solstice Nearest-Monday year-start)
December 12th  (Roman-Gregorian)
December 13th  (Hanke-Henry)
2019-W02-6   (ISO WeekDate)
22 Nivose CCXXVII  (French-Republican)


Karl

Saturday Beta January 2019
----Original message----
From : [hidden email]
Date : 11/01/2019 - 14:53 (GMT)
To : [hidden email]
Subject : Re: Week & Month Month start differences from Gregorian

I'd say a week is a lot, especially when compared to Hanke-Henry.

If the a Hanke-Henry year and a Roman-Gregorian year start on the same day, then Hanke-Henry's months' starting days never differs from those of the Roman months by more than 1 day.  Hanke-Henry's months' average difference in that regard is 2/3 of a day.

With 28,35,28 quarters, starting on the same day as the Roman months, March starts 4 days later than Roman March.   ...and the average difference in month-start, from the Roman months, is 1.83 days.

Hanke-Henry's year-start day never differs from that of Roman-Gregorian by more than 3 days.  That can't be said for calendars with other year-start rules. In fact, it seems to me, Karl said that his leapyear-rule has a peak-to-peak jitter-amplitude of 2 weeks.

Either you want to imitate Roman-Gregorian or you don't. Hanke-Henry does, and its dates are seaonally-meaningful, given our 2000-year familiarity with the seasonal meanings of the Roman months. 

That can't be said for 28,35,28.    ...which is why I've asked Karl what the 28,35,28 months are supposed to mean, and what is accomplished by naming them after the Roman months and starting the year near the Roman-Gregorian year-start day.

6-Seasons  -3 wk Offset makes no attempt to imitate Roman Gregorian. In the version that I prefer, 6-Seasons  -3 wk Offset doesn't have months. In the version that has months, those months have no resemblance to the Roman months, nor are they intended to.

By the way, 6-Seasons  -3 wk Offset divides neatly into quarters.  Nominal North and South are each a quarter-year.  Nominal Pre-Northward and Northward add up to a quarter-year.

...for anyone who considers neat division into quarters important.

Today is Late-South Week3  Friday.   We're in the 3rd week of the 10-week Late-South--the colder part of winter in north temperate climates.  In other words, that date explicitly says that we're about 1/3 of the way through the more extreme part of Winter.

Late-South  Week3  Friday (6-Seasons -3 wk Offset)
2019-03-5  (South-Solstice WeekDate)

Michael Ossipoff



On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 5:34 AM K PALMEN <[hidden email]> wrote:
Dear Calendar People

Irv has kindly calculated the number of Week & Months calendar months that start a certain number of days different from the corresponding Gregorian Month. The figures would also apply to Symmetry454 months, if the ISO week date years were used.

The first column is the number of days the Week & Month calendar month begins before the corresponding Gregorian month, which is also the number of days the Gregorian month begins after the corresponding Week & Month calendar month.

The second column is the number of months in a 400-year cycle of 4800 months that have the difference specified in the first column.

The third column is the approximate percentage of such months.

-7 43 0.90%  (March 7 days out)
-6 101 2.10%
-5 200 4.17%
-4 316 6.58%
-3 444 9.25%
-2 499 10.40%
-1 560 11.67%
 0 628 13.08%
+1 586 12.21%
+2 485 10.10%
+3 369 7.69%
+4 243 5.06%
+5 185 3.85%
+6 128 2.67%
+7 13 0.27% (November 7 days out)

Just 1229 out of 4800 months (25.60%) are more than 3 days out.
 
Karl

Monday Beta January 2019




Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Week & Month Month start differences from Gregorian

Michael Ossipoff

This reply is late, because there were postings at other forums that (though they appeared later) were more deserving of a prompt reply.

.

Karl says:

.

[quote]

Dear Michael and Calendar People

.

I don't care about Michael's opinions about seasons and solar calendars.

.

Karl

[/quote]

.

Though it’s no one else’s business or concern what Karl does or doesn’t care about, and though that matter is off-topic here, I thank Karl for sharing with us his childishly pouty feelings.

.

Many people evidently have a great need for competition and aggression.  That’s blatantly obvious in the news, and of course also on the part of a few of this mailing-list’s frequent-posters.

.

What can I say—I’m sorry that those people have that need. But such people are just a fact-of-life, an indication and a cause of the quality of the societal world that we live in.

.

South-Solstice WeekDate isn’t based on opinions. It’s just an astronomical seasonal calendar whose week-numbers are a good direct indication of solar ecliptic-longitude.   …which gives some idea of the solar-declination and is direction of change.

.

Likewise the month-numbers of South-Soltsice 28X13.

.

(As I’ve said, I realize that South-Solstice WeekDate isn’t new, but it has what I consider the best year-start rule.)

.

6-Seasons  -3 wk Offset is indeed designed to model some opinions about seasons. But they aren’t only my opinions. They’re broad consensus opinions regarding seasons in the “temperate-zones”.

.

I’ve told where those consensuses are described.  There’s good agreement that the north season starts when June starts, and that the South season starts when December starts.

.

Yes, those opinions are often found with a statement that (in north-temperate places) terrestrial Spring begins when March begins.  But there’s another consensus that there are 6 seasons, including a Pre-Spring…which most would agree would be where March is.

.

So am I cherry-picking?  Well, I’m not claiming that everyone agrees with those calendars’ nominal-seasons. My point is just that there are some wide consensuses that agree with me, and it’s on them that 6-Seasons  -3 wk Offset is based.

.

6-Season  0 Offset is simpler, and its Winter and Summer starts are agreed-to by those who don’t call it winter until the Winter-Solstice, because they presumably only count the later, more extreme, part of Winter as “Winter”.   6-Season  0 Offset is simpler, and its North and South season starts aren’t without support.  But I prefer 6-Season  -3 wk Offset, and many agree with its North and South season-starts too.

.

So no, those calendars’ basis doesn’t consist only of my opinions.

.

It’s ok if Karl doesn’t care about them, but it isn’t quite clear why he finds it necessary to tell us that.

.

I don’t have time to post to tell about everything that I don’t care about.

.

But I give Karl permission to not care about seasonal calendars.

.

Though those consensuses regarding the beginnings of the North and South seasons, and the Pre-Spring and Pre-Autumn seasons, are about the (north and south) temperate-zones, they aren’t really so place-specific:

.

After all, they only refer to solar-declination.  Whether you live in a temperate-zone, or the Tropics, or the Arctic, those nominal-season-names tell you where the solar-declination is, and how it’s changing.   …and you know what that means for your location.

.

Yes, you also know what the Roman months mean for your location.  Then why propose a calendar with nominal-seasons named for solar-declination?  Why not just keep the 12 Roman months? Because, as I’ve been saying, my seasonal-calendar proposals are intended for a hypothetical future time when people demand a complete departure from the past.  At such a time, continuing to name months for Roman emperors, Roman deities, and a no longer valid numbering-system—for no reason other than that we’ve always done so—just wouldn’t do.

.

For people who want minimal change, I suggest Hanke-Henry (…but without eliminating time-zones and the national date-line, and with holiday days-off not on weekends).

.

Anyway, I admit that Karl might not have heard of any other proposal for a genuine astronomical-terrestrial calendar…one that doesn’t just arbitrarily name and use the astronomical-quarters as nominal terrestrial-seasons.  …one whose nominal terrestrial-seasons are tailored to other wide consensuses regarding temperate-zone seasons.

.

I admit that that newness has upset two people here.

.

I’ve found that 454 is too different for people who don’t want drastic calendar-change. Most people don’t want calendar change, and, from my conversations, I haven’t found anything more radical than Hanke-Henry to be acceptable to such people.

.

Evidently 454, with its Roman-named months and its Roman-Gregorian year-start isn’t different enough for people who want something different.  I’ve found that the people who are favorable to calendar reform unanimously prefer the more radical calendar-reform proposals, such as WeekDate, 28X13,  Asimov’s World-Seasonal, and French-Republican.

.

That’s why I’ve added South-Solstice 28X13 to my calendar-proposals.

.

I haven’t found _anyone_ who reacted favorably when I told them about 454 with Roman month-names, starting near Gregorian January 1st. I’ve gotten acceptance reactions for Hanke-Henry from people who don’t want calendar-reform. I’ve heard preference for WeekDate, 28X13, Asimov’s World-Seasonal, or French-Republican from people favorable to calendar-reform.

.

By the way, I admit that WeekDate and 28X13 are both more convenient and practical than 6-Seasons 0 Offset and 6-Seasons  -3 wk Offset.  But here’s the thing:  No one finds Roman-Gregorian inconvenient.  There are only very few calendar-reform advocates, and of course those very few are the only people who object to, or even perceive,  “inconvenience” of Roman-Gregorian.

.

Therefore, for me, explicit seasonality is a better goal than optimal convenience.  Of course

6-Seasons  -3 wk Offset and 6-Seasons 0 Offset nonetheless have improved-convenience—just not as much as South-Solstice WeekDate and South-Solstice 28X13.

.

As I’ve mentioned, South-Solstice 28X13 could have its months seasonally-named (by solar-declination, as with my other seasonal calendars), but that seasonal-naming wouldn’t be as good, because it wouldn’t be flexibly tailored to those consensuses.  But the effort should probably be made.

.

By the way, here’s how I briefly state my Nearest-Monday year-start rule, when I post the dates by my calendars at forums and mailing-lists:

.

“…using the Nearest-Monday year-start rule, whereby the calendar-year starts with the Monday that starts closest to the South-Solstice.

.

…or to an _approximation_ to the South-Solstice, based on the assumption that a South-Solstice occurs exactly every 365.2422 days.

.

…starting from the actual South-Solstice of Gregorian 2087.

.

The latter, arithmetical, rule is the one that I propose.”

.

I usually only date my posts with South-Solstice WeekDate, South-Solstce 28X13, and Roman-Gregorian, because they’re well-defined by their names.

.

But sometimes, if calendar-reform isn’t too far from the topic of a forum or mailing-list, I’ll include

6-Seasons  -3 wk Offset’s date, with a brief definition of the current nominal-season.

.

For example, in this season,  I say: 

.

“…where “South” refers to the 13-week terrestrial-season caused by extreme south solar-declination.   …roughly December, January  & February.   And “Late” refers to the part of South after the South-Solstice year-start.”

.

 As I said, I don’t usually include 6-Seasons  -3 wk Offset, unless it’s a forum or mailing-list that would accept the mention of a calendar-proposal that isn’t obvious from its name.

.

Speaking of obviousness from name, when I refer to South-Solstice 28X13, I instead call it:

.

“South-Solstice Equal 28-Day Months”.

.

2019-W04-3  (South-Solstice WeekDate)

2019-W03-3  (ISO WeekDate)

Late-South  Week 4  Wednesday  (6-Seasons  -3 wk Offset)

South  Week 4  Wednesday  (6-Seasons  0 Offset)

Month 1  Week 4  Wednesday  (South-Solstice Equal 28-Day Months)

January 16th  (Roman-Gregorian)

January 17th  (Hanke-Henry)

26 Nivose (Snowy) CCXXVII  (French-Republican Calendar of 1792)

.

Michael Ossipoff

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

 

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Week & Month Month start differences from Gregorian

Michael Ossipoff

I said:


…starting from the actual South-Solstice of Gregorian 2087.

.


I meant:

...starting from the actual South-Solstice of Gregorian 2017.

Michael Ossipoff

On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 11:20 AM Michael Ossipoff <[hidden email]> wrote:

This reply is late, because there were postings at other forums that (though they appeared later) were more deserving of a prompt reply.

.

Karl says:

.

[quote]

Dear Michael and Calendar People

.

I don't care about Michael's opinions about seasons and solar calendars.

.

Karl

[/quote]

.

Though it’s no one else’s business or concern what Karl does or doesn’t care about, and though that matter is off-topic here, I thank Karl for sharing with us his childishly pouty feelings.

.

Many people evidently have a great need for competition and aggression.  That’s blatantly obvious in the news, and of course also on the part of a few of this mailing-list’s frequent-posters.

.

What can I say—I’m sorry that those people have that need. But such people are just a fact-of-life, an indication and a cause of the quality of the societal world that we live in.

.

South-Solstice WeekDate isn’t based on opinions. It’s just an astronomical seasonal calendar whose week-numbers are a good direct indication of solar ecliptic-longitude.   …which gives some idea of the solar-declination and is direction of change.

.

Likewise the month-numbers of South-Soltsice 28X13.

.

(As I’ve said, I realize that South-Solstice WeekDate isn’t new, but it has what I consider the best year-start rule.)

.

6-Seasons  -3 wk Offset is indeed designed to model some opinions about seasons. But they aren’t only my opinions. They’re broad consensus opinions regarding seasons in the “temperate-zones”.

.

I’ve told where those consensuses are described.  There’s good agreement that the north season starts when June starts, and that the South season starts when December starts.

.

Yes, those opinions are often found with a statement that (in north-temperate places) terrestrial Spring begins when March begins.  But there’s another consensus that there are 6 seasons, including a Pre-Spring…which most would agree would be where March is.

.

So am I cherry-picking?  Well, I’m not claiming that everyone agrees with those calendars’ nominal-seasons. My point is just that there are some wide consensuses that agree with me, and it’s on them that 6-Seasons  -3 wk Offset is based.

.

6-Season  0 Offset is simpler, and its Winter and Summer starts are agreed-to by those who don’t call it winter until the Winter-Solstice, because they presumably only count the later, more extreme, part of Winter as “Winter”.   6-Season  0 Offset is simpler, and its North and South season starts aren’t without support.  But I prefer 6-Season  -3 wk Offset, and many agree with its North and South season-starts too.

.

So no, those calendars’ basis doesn’t consist only of my opinions.

.

It’s ok if Karl doesn’t care about them, but it isn’t quite clear why he finds it necessary to tell us that.

.

I don’t have time to post to tell about everything that I don’t care about.

.

But I give Karl permission to not care about seasonal calendars.

.

Though those consensuses regarding the beginnings of the North and South seasons, and the Pre-Spring and Pre-Autumn seasons, are about the (north and south) temperate-zones, they aren’t really so place-specific:

.

After all, they only refer to solar-declination.  Whether you live in a temperate-zone, or the Tropics, or the Arctic, those nominal-season-names tell you where the solar-declination is, and how it’s changing.   …and you know what that means for your location.

.

Yes, you also know what the Roman months mean for your location.  Then why propose a calendar with nominal-seasons named for solar-declination?  Why not just keep the 12 Roman months? Because, as I’ve been saying, my seasonal-calendar proposals are intended for a hypothetical future time when people demand a complete departure from the past.  At such a time, continuing to name months for Roman emperors, Roman deities, and a no longer valid numbering-system—for no reason other than that we’ve always done so—just wouldn’t do.

.

For people who want minimal change, I suggest Hanke-Henry (…but without eliminating time-zones and the national date-line, and with holiday days-off not on weekends).

.

Anyway, I admit that Karl might not have heard of any other proposal for a genuine astronomical-terrestrial calendar…one that doesn’t just arbitrarily name and use the astronomical-quarters as nominal terrestrial-seasons.  …one whose nominal terrestrial-seasons are tailored to other wide consensuses regarding temperate-zone seasons.

.

I admit that that newness has upset two people here.

.

I’ve found that 454 is too different for people who don’t want drastic calendar-change. Most people don’t want calendar change, and, from my conversations, I haven’t found anything more radical than Hanke-Henry to be acceptable to such people.

.

Evidently 454, with its Roman-named months and its Roman-Gregorian year-start isn’t different enough for people who want something different.  I’ve found that the people who are favorable to calendar reform unanimously prefer the more radical calendar-reform proposals, such as WeekDate, 28X13,  Asimov’s World-Seasonal, and French-Republican.

.

That’s why I’ve added South-Solstice 28X13 to my calendar-proposals.

.

I haven’t found _anyone_ who reacted favorably when I told them about 454 with Roman month-names, starting near Gregorian January 1st. I’ve gotten acceptance reactions for Hanke-Henry from people who don’t want calendar-reform. I’ve heard preference for WeekDate, 28X13, Asimov’s World-Seasonal, or French-Republican from people favorable to calendar-reform.

.

By the way, I admit that WeekDate and 28X13 are both more convenient and practical than 6-Seasons 0 Offset and 6-Seasons  -3 wk Offset.  But here’s the thing:  No one finds Roman-Gregorian inconvenient.  There are only very few calendar-reform advocates, and of course those very few are the only people who object to, or even perceive,  “inconvenience” of Roman-Gregorian.

.

Therefore, for me, explicit seasonality is a better goal than optimal convenience.  Of course

6-Seasons  -3 wk Offset and 6-Seasons 0 Offset nonetheless have improved-convenience—just not as much as South-Solstice WeekDate and South-Solstice 28X13.

.

As I’ve mentioned, South-Solstice 28X13 could have its months seasonally-named (by solar-declination, as with my other seasonal calendars), but that seasonal-naming wouldn’t be as good, because it wouldn’t be flexibly tailored to those consensuses.  But the effort should probably be made.

.

By the way, here’s how I briefly state my Nearest-Monday year-start rule, when I post the dates by my calendars at forums and mailing-lists:

.

“…using the Nearest-Monday year-start rule, whereby the calendar-year starts with the Monday that starts closest to the South-Solstice.

.

…or to an _approximation_ to the South-Solstice, based on the assumption that a South-Solstice occurs exactly every 365.2422 days.

.

…starting from the actual South-Solstice of Gregorian 2087.

.

The latter, arithmetical, rule is the one that I propose.”

.

I usually only date my posts with South-Solstice WeekDate, South-Solstce 28X13, and Roman-Gregorian, because they’re well-defined by their names.

.

But sometimes, if calendar-reform isn’t too far from the topic of a forum or mailing-list, I’ll include

6-Seasons  -3 wk Offset’s date, with a brief definition of the current nominal-season.

.

For example, in this season,  I say: 

.

“…where “South” refers to the 13-week terrestrial-season caused by extreme south solar-declination.   …roughly December, January  & February.   And “Late” refers to the part of South after the South-Solstice year-start.”

.

 As I said, I don’t usually include 6-Seasons  -3 wk Offset, unless it’s a forum or mailing-list that would accept the mention of a calendar-proposal that isn’t obvious from its name.

.

Speaking of obviousness from name, when I refer to South-Solstice 28X13, I instead call it:

.

“South-Solstice Equal 28-Day Months”.

.

2019-W04-3  (South-Solstice WeekDate)

2019-W03-3  (ISO WeekDate)

Late-South  Week 4  Wednesday  (6-Seasons  -3 wk Offset)

South  Week 4  Wednesday  (6-Seasons  0 Offset)

Month 1  Week 4  Wednesday  (South-Solstice Equal 28-Day Months)

January 16th  (Roman-Gregorian)

January 17th  (Hanke-Henry)

26 Nivose (Snowy) CCXXVII  (French-Republican Calendar of 1792)

.

Michael Ossipoff