(no subject)

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

(no subject)

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

Michael has suggested some calendars such as the 28&14. I haven't seen him reckon the ranges of the equinoxes and solstices in any of them. I have done so for my Week & Month Calendar.

March Equinox: Friday Beta to Saturday Gamma March
June Solstices: Sunday Beta to Monday Delta June
September Equinox: Wednesday Gamma to Thursday Delta
December Solstice: Tuesday Gamma to Wednesday Delta

It is easier to do for a minimum displacement calendar. Take any displacement year. Subtract the displacement from the equinox and solstice times, then one gets the approximate equinox and solstice times for a year of displacement zero and these times occur very near the middle of the ranges, which are about 7 days, so one should be able to easily calculate the ranges to the nearest day, like I have shown above. They should be one day shorter.

Karl

Saturday Beta December 2018



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Equinox and Solstice Dates in Calendars

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

Oops! I accidentally sent my last note without subject. Please reply to this note instead.

Karl
----Original message----
From : [hidden email]
Date : 15/12/2018 - 11:12 (GMT)
To : [hidden email]
Subject :

Dear Michael and Calendar People

Michael has suggested some calendars such as the 28&14. I haven't seen him reckon the ranges of the equinoxes and solstices in any of them. I have done so for my Week & Month Calendar.

March Equinox: Friday Beta to Saturday Gamma March
June Solstices: Sunday Beta to Monday Delta June
September Equinox: Wednesday Gamma to Thursday Delta
December Solstice: Tuesday Gamma to Wednesday Delta

It is easier to do for a minimum displacement calendar. Take any displacement year. Subtract the displacement from the equinox and solstice times, then one gets the approximate equinox and solstice times for a year of displacement zero and these times occur very near the middle of the ranges, which are about 7 days, so one should be able to easily calculate the ranges to the nearest day, like I have shown above. They should be one day shorter.

Karl

Saturday Beta December 2018





Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Equinox and Solstice Dates in Calendars

Michael Ossipoff


On Sat, Dec 15, 2018 at 6:24 AM K PALMEN <[hidden email]> wrote:
Dear Michael and Calendar People

Oops! I accidentally sent my last note without subject. Please reply to this note instead.

Karl
----Original message----
From : [hidden email]
Date : 15/12/2018 - 11:12 (GMT)
To : [hidden email]
Subject :

Dear Michael and Calendar People

Michael has suggested some calendars such as the 28&14. I haven't seen him reckon the ranges of the equinoxes and solstices in any of them. I have done so for my Week & Month Calendar.

March Equinox: Friday Beta to Saturday Gamma March
June Solstices: Sunday Beta to Monday Delta June
September Equinox: Wednesday Gamma to Thursday Delta
December Solstice: Tuesday Gamma to Wednesday Delta

It is easier to do for a minimum displacement calendar. Take any displacement year. Subtract the displacement from the equinox and solstice times, then one gets the approximate equinox and solstice times for a year of displacement zero and these times occur very near the middle of the ranges, which are about 7 days, so one should be able to easily calculate the ranges to the nearest day, like I have shown above. They should be one day shorter.

For a Nearest-Monday versions based directly on a solstice or equinox, the peak-to-peak jitter-amplitude is a week.

For a Nearest-Monday version based on a sequence of Y-day periods, where Y is a chosen reference tropical-year-length, the peak-to-peak jitter amplitude  is a week, and is superimposed on a slight drift-rate due to whatever imprecision Y has.   It would make sense for Y to be chosen to be the reference tropical-year based on the solstice or equinox most of interest, maybe the one on which the year starts.

For 5&4 SC, I've proposed that either:

1. The year starts on the Monday that starts on the midnight that's closest to the South-Solstice.

or

2. Every Y days, a year starts on the Monday that starts on the midnight that's closest to the end of that Y-day period.

...where the first Y-day period starts at some specified instance of a South-Solstice.

(I suggest 365.2422 days as Y.  That's the approxmate value for the mean-tropical-year, in mean solar days, that I find on the Internet. Its inaccuracy isn't problematic in the context of the jitter of a leapweek calendar,)

For the Gregorian-based Nearest Monday of ISO WeekDate and Hanke-Henry, the maximum periodic displacement is more involved, and I posted about it some time ago.  Briefly, that Nearest-Monday's peak-to-peak jitter-amplitude is considerably less than the pessimistic estimate of "The Gregorian peak-to-peak jitter amplitude plus a week".  Gregorian-based Nearest-Monday proved surprisingly accurate.

If this list's messages are archived, I could find that old post, or you could.

Early South  Week 2  Saturdaay  (5&4 SC version 1)
South1  Week 2  Saturday (5&4 SC version 2)
2018-W50-6  (ISO WeekDate)
2018-W51-6  (South-Solstice WeekDate)
December 15th  (Roman-Gregorian)
December 16th (Hanke-Henry)

Michael Ossipoff






 

 






Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Equinox and Solstice Dates in Calendars

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

Thank you Michael for your reply. I'll consider the second variation based on the Y-day periods. The displacement of a year is then how long its Y-day period begins after the start of the calendar year.

This year the southern solstice occurs Fri, 21 Dec 2018 22:21:51 GMT so The next new year's day would be Mon 24 Dec 2018. 

The range for the southern solstice is thus about noon Thursday of the last week to noon Thursday of the week 1 of Michael's year. I can work out the ranges for the equinoxes and other solstice, using their times relative to southern solstice.

The Northward Equinox begins about 12 weeks 5 days 0 hours after the Southern Solstice
The Northern Solstice begins about 25 weeks 6 days 19 hours after the Southern Solstice
The Southward Equinox begins about 39 weeks 2 days 9 hours after the Southern Solstice

So the days of the equinoxes and solstices would be in the following ranges (for UTC/GMT)

Thursday Last week to Thursday Week 1
Tuesday Week 13 to Tuesday Week 14
Thursday Week 26 to Thursday Week 27
Saturday Week 39 to Saturday Week 40.

The calculation of these ranges assume that the leap week is at the end of the year.

In the long term, these ranges will oscillate if Y is kept near the mean tropical year. The Southern Solstice and Northward equinox currently drifting later and the other two are currently drifting earlier. The ranges allowing for these long term drifts would be almost 2 weeks in duration.

Similar movement of the ranges in my Week & Month Calendar would occur assuming the leap year rule is kept accurate.

Note that the first variation, which is based on the Southern Solstice would for a couple of thousand years at least have a considerably longer mean year than 365.2422 days (currently about 365.2427 days). 

Karl

Sunday Beta December 2018

----Original message----
From : [hidden email]
Date : 15/12/2018 - 16:10 (GMT)
To : [hidden email]
Subject : Re: Equinox and Solstice Dates in Calendars



On Sat, Dec 15, 2018 at 6:24 AM K PALMEN <[hidden email]> wrote:
Dear Michael and Calendar People

Oops! I accidentally sent my last note without subject. Please reply to this note instead.

Karl
----Original message----
From : [hidden email]
Date : 15/12/2018 - 11:12 (GMT)
To : [hidden email]
Subject :

Dear Michael and Calendar People

Michael has suggested some calendars such as the 28&14. I haven't seen him reckon the ranges of the equinoxes and solstices in any of them. I have done so for my Week & Month Calendar.

March Equinox: Friday Beta to Saturday Gamma March
June Solstices: Sunday Beta to Monday Delta June
September Equinox: Wednesday Gamma to Thursday Delta
December Solstice: Tuesday Gamma to Wednesday Delta

It is easier to do for a minimum displacement calendar. Take any displacement year. Subtract the displacement from the equinox and solstice times, then one gets the approximate equinox and solstice times for a year of displacement zero and these times occur very near the middle of the ranges, which are about 7 days, so one should be able to easily calculate the ranges to the nearest day, like I have shown above. They should be one day shorter.

For a Nearest-Monday versions based directly on a solstice or equinox, the peak-to-peak jitter-amplitude is a week.

For a Nearest-Monday version based on a sequence of Y-day periods, where Y is a chosen reference tropical-year-length, the peak-to-peak jitter amplitude  is a week, and is superimposed on a slight drift-rate due to whatever imprecision Y has.   It would make sense for Y to be chosen to be the reference tropical-year based on the solstice or equinox most of interest, maybe the one on which the year starts.

For 5&4 SC, I've proposed that either:

1. The year starts on the Monday that starts on the midnight that's closest to the South-Solstice.

or

2. Every Y days, a year starts on the Monday that starts on the midnight that's closest to the end of that Y-day period.

...where the first Y-day period starts at some specified instance of a South-Solstice.

(I suggest 365.2422 days as Y.  That's the approxmate value for the mean-tropical-year, in mean solar days, that I find on the Internet. Its inaccuracy isn't problematic in the context of the jitter of a leapweek calendar,)

For the Gregorian-based Nearest Monday of ISO WeekDate and Hanke-Henry, the maximum periodic displacement is more involved, and I posted about it some time ago.  Briefly, that Nearest-Monday's peak-to-peak jitter-amplitude is considerably less than the pessimistic estimate of "The Gregorian peak-to-peak jitter amplitude plus a week".  Gregorian-based Nearest-Monday proved surprisingly accurate.

If this list's messages are archived, I could find that old post, or you could.

Early South  Week 2  Saturdaay  (5&4 SC version 1)
South1  Week 2  Saturday (5&4 SC version 2)
2018-W50-6  (ISO WeekDate)
2018-W51-6  (South-Solstice WeekDate)
December 15th  (Roman-Gregorian)
December 16th (Hanke-Henry)

Michael Ossipoff






 

 








Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Equinox and Solstice Dates in Calendars

Brij Bhushan metric VIJ
>This year the southern solstice occurs Fri, 21 Dec 2018 22:21:51 GMT so The next new year's day would be <a href="x-apple-data-detectors://2" dir="ltr" x-apple-data-detectors="true" x-apple-data-detectors-type="calendar-event" x-apple-data-detectors-result="2" style="-webkit-text-decoration-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.258824);">Mon 24 Dec 2018. 
My daughter Monica was born that date in 1970!
(Brij B VIJ) Flt Lt (Retd)

Sent from my iPhone

On Dec 16, 2018, at 03:39, K PALMEN <[hidden email]> wrote:

Dear Michael and Calendar People

Thank you Michael for your reply. I'll consider the second variation based on the Y-day periods. The displacement of a year is then how long its Y-day period begins after the start of the calendar year.

This year the southern solstice occurs Fri, 21 Dec 2018 22:21:51 GMT so The next new year's day would be Mon 24 Dec 2018. 

The range for the southern solstice is thus about noon Thursday of the last week to noon Thursday of the week 1 of Michael's year. I can work out the ranges for the equinoxes and other solstice, using their times relative to southern solstice.

The Northward Equinox begins about 12 weeks 5 days 0 hours after the Southern Solstice
The Northern Solstice begins about 25 weeks 6 days 19 hours after the Southern Solstice
The Southward Equinox begins about 39 weeks 2 days 9 hours after the Southern Solstice

So the days of the equinoxes and solstices would be in the following ranges (for UTC/GMT)

Thursday Last week to Thursday Week 1
Tuesday Week 13 to Tuesday Week 14
Thursday Week 26 to Thursday Week 27
Saturday Week 39 to Saturday Week 40.

The calculation of these ranges assume that the leap week is at the end of the year.

In the long term, these ranges will oscillate if Y is kept near the mean tropical year. The Southern Solstice and Northward equinox currently drifting later and the other two are currently drifting earlier. The ranges allowing for these long term drifts would be almost 2 weeks in duration.

Similar movement of the ranges in my Week & Month Calendar would occur assuming the leap year rule is kept accurate.

Note that the first variation, which is based on the Southern Solstice would for a couple of thousand years at least have a considerably longer mean year than 365.2422 days (currently about 365.2427 days). 

Karl

Sunday Beta December 2018

----Original message----
From : [hidden email]
Date : 15/12/2018 - 16:10 (GMT)
To : [hidden email]
Subject : Re: Equinox and Solstice Dates in Calendars



On Sat, Dec 15, 2018 at 6:24 AM K PALMEN <[hidden email]> wrote:
Dear Michael and Calendar People

Oops! I accidentally sent my last note without subject. Please reply to this note instead.

Karl
----Original message----
From : [hidden email]
Date : 15/12/2018 - 11:12 (GMT)
To : [hidden email]
Subject :

Dear Michael and Calendar People

Michael has suggested some calendars such as the 28&14. I haven't seen him reckon the ranges of the equinoxes and solstices in any of them. I have done so for my Week & Month Calendar.

March Equinox: Friday Beta to Saturday Gamma March
June Solstices: Sunday Beta to Monday Delta June
September Equinox: Wednesday Gamma to Thursday Delta
December Solstice: Tuesday Gamma to Wednesday Delta

It is easier to do for a minimum displacement calendar. Take any displacement year. Subtract the displacement from the equinox and solstice times, then one gets the approximate equinox and solstice times for a year of displacement zero and these times occur very near the middle of the ranges, which are about 7 days, so one should be able to easily calculate the ranges to the nearest day, like I have shown above. They should be one day shorter.

For a Nearest-Monday versions based directly on a solstice or equinox, the peak-to-peak jitter-amplitude is a week.

For a Nearest-Monday version based on a sequence of Y-day periods, where Y is a chosen reference tropical-year-length, the peak-to-peak jitter amplitude  is a week, and is superimposed on a slight drift-rate due to whatever imprecision Y has.   It would make sense for Y to be chosen to be the reference tropical-year based on the solstice or equinox most of interest, maybe the one on which the year starts.

For 5&4 SC, I've proposed that either:

1. The year starts on the Monday that starts on the midnight that's closest to the South-Solstice.

or

2. Every Y days, a year starts on the Monday that starts on the midnight that's closest to the end of that Y-day period.

...where the first Y-day period starts at some specified instance of a South-Solstice.

(I suggest 365.2422 days as Y.  That's the approxmate value for the mean-tropical-year, in mean solar days, that I find on the Internet. Its inaccuracy isn't problematic in the context of the jitter of a leapweek calendar,)

For the Gregorian-based Nearest Monday of ISO WeekDate and Hanke-Henry, the maximum periodic displacement is more involved, and I posted about it some time ago.  Briefly, that Nearest-Monday's peak-to-peak jitter-amplitude is considerably less than the pessimistic estimate of "The Gregorian peak-to-peak jitter amplitude plus a week".  Gregorian-based Nearest-Monday proved surprisingly accurate.

If this list's messages are archived, I could find that old post, or you could.

Early South  Week 2  Saturdaay  (5&4 SC version 1)
South1  Week 2  Saturday (5&4 SC version 2)
2018-W50-6  (ISO WeekDate)
2018-W51-6  (South-Solstice WeekDate)
December 15th  (Roman-Gregorian)
December 16th (Hanke-Henry)

Michael Ossipoff






 

 








Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Equinox and Solstice Dates in Calendars

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

Michael said:

For 5&4 SC, I've proposed that either:

1. The year starts on the Monday that starts on the midnight that's closest to the South-Solstice. 

or 

2. Every Y days, a year starts on the Monday that starts on the midnight that's closest to the end of that Y-day period.

...where the first Y-day period starts at some specified instance of a South-Solstice.

KARL REPLIES: Is Michael aware that this year would be a leap year? 
The southern solstice jumps noon Thursday.

Karl 

Sunday Beta December 2018

----Original message----
From : [hidden email]
Date : 15/12/2018 - 16:10 (GMT)
To : [hidden email]
Subject : Re: Equinox and Solstice Dates in Calendars



On Sat, Dec 15, 2018 at 6:24 AM K PALMEN <[hidden email]> wrote:
Dear Michael and Calendar People

Oops! I accidentally sent my last note without subject. Please reply to this note instead.

Karl
----Original message----
From : [hidden email]
Date : 15/12/2018 - 11:12 (GMT)
To : [hidden email]
Subject :

Dear Michael and Calendar People

Michael has suggested some calendars such as the 28&14. I haven't seen him reckon the ranges of the equinoxes and solstices in any of them. I have done so for my Week & Month Calendar.

March Equinox: Friday Beta to Saturday Gamma March
June Solstices: Sunday Beta to Monday Delta June
September Equinox: Wednesday Gamma to Thursday Delta
December Solstice: Tuesday Gamma to Wednesday Delta

It is easier to do for a minimum displacement calendar. Take any displacement year. Subtract the displacement from the equinox and solstice times, then one gets the approximate equinox and solstice times for a year of displacement zero and these times occur very near the middle of the ranges, which are about 7 days, so one should be able to easily calculate the ranges to the nearest day, like I have shown above. They should be one day shorter.

For a Nearest-Monday versions based directly on a solstice or equinox, the peak-to-peak jitter-amplitude is a week.

For a Nearest-Monday version based on a sequence of Y-day periods, where Y is a chosen reference tropical-year-length, the peak-to-peak jitter amplitude  is a week, and is superimposed on a slight drift-rate due to whatever imprecision Y has.   It would make sense for Y to be chosen to be the reference tropical-year based on the solstice or equinox most of interest, maybe the one on which the year starts.

For 5&4 SC, I've proposed that either:

1. The year starts on the Monday that starts on the midnight that's closest to the South-Solstice.

or

2. Every Y days, a year starts on the Monday that starts on the midnight that's closest to the end of that Y-day period.

...where the first Y-day period starts at some specified instance of a South-Solstice.

(I suggest 365.2422 days as Y.  That's the approxmate value for the mean-tropical-year, in mean solar days, that I find on the Internet. Its inaccuracy isn't problematic in the context of the jitter of a leapweek calendar,)

For the Gregorian-based Nearest Monday of ISO WeekDate and Hanke-Henry, the maximum periodic displacement is more involved, and I posted about it some time ago.  Briefly, that Nearest-Monday's peak-to-peak jitter-amplitude is considerably less than the pessimistic estimate of "The Gregorian peak-to-peak jitter amplitude plus a week".  Gregorian-based Nearest-Monday proved surprisingly accurate.

If this list's messages are archived, I could find that old post, or you could.

Early South  Week 2  Saturdaay  (5&4 SC version 1)
South1  Week 2  Saturday (5&4 SC version 2)
2018-W50-6  (ISO WeekDate)
2018-W51-6  (South-Solstice WeekDate)
December 15th  (Roman-Gregorian)
December 16th (Hanke-Henry)

Michael Ossipoff






 

 








Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Equinox and Solstice Dates in Calendars

Michael Ossipoff

Karl—

.

You wrote:

.

[quote]

Note that the first variation, which is based on the Southern Solstice would for a couple of thousand years at least have a considerably longer mean year than 365.2422 days (currently about 365.2427 days).

[/quote]

.

Yes, but I like the mean-tropical year, because it gives best minimum accuracy throughout a year, and because it’s more familiar to people, and easier to find the length of on the Internet.

.

Of course, at the time of a hypothetical Utopian-Epoch, and if people then want a complete break with the past, then who knows, maybe they’d like to use the North-Solstice year as the reference-tropical-year (RTY).  That appeals to me too, because it complies with what the astronomy suggests.  I like how Irv put it: “Welcome to the first millennium of the Age of the North Solstice!” 

.

[quote]

Is Michael aware that this year would be a leap year? 

[/quote]

.

Yes, this is a leapyear in 5&4 SC, and in 28&14, if the year starts on the Monday that’s closest to the (midnight-to-midnight) day containing the desired-time.

.

That year-start rule is a version of the general class of Nearest-Monday year-start rules.

.

But I’m using the following version:

.

The year starts on the Monday that starts at the midnight that’s closest to the desired-time.

.

That rule is more accurate—Its year starts closer to the desired-time.

.

The version that you used, the one that starts the year on the Monday closest to the day that contains the desired-time, has the following advantages:

.

1. It’s briefer to state the definition.

.

2. It’s a bit more convenient to implement.

.

The version that I use, which starts the year on the Monday that starts on the midnight that’s closest to the desired-time, has the following advantage:

.

It’s a bit more accurate.

.

Admittedly, the accuracy-difference is small in comparison to the jitter of a leapweek calendar.

It’s impossible to guess which one that hypothetical Utopian-Epoch population would prefer.

.

Speaking just for myself?  I like the better accuracy of the slightly more accurate one. But of course the choice would depend on what the population as a whole preferred.

.

Anyway, by the version that I’m using—the one that starts the year on the Monday that starts on the midnight that’s closest to the desired-time—this year isn’t a leapyear.

.

As I said above, this indeed is a leapyear by the version that you used, the one that starts the year on the Monday that’s closes to the (midnight-to-midnight) day that contains the desired-time.

.

Anyway, though it’s unknowable which one a hypothetical Utopian-Epoch population would prefer, of course I should keep using the one that on which are based the dates that I’ve been posting at my message-signatures, for the sake of consistency.

.

Early South  Week 2  Sunday  (5&4 SC version 1)

South1  Week 2  Sunday (5&4 SC version 2)

2018-W50-7  (ISO WeekDate)

2018-W51-7  (South-Solstice WeekDate)

December 16th  (Roman-Gregorian)

December 17th (Hanke-Henry)

.

Michael Ossipoff

 

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Equinox and Solstice Dates in Calendars

k.palmen@btinternet.com
Dear Michael and Calendar People
----Original message----
From : [hidden email]
Date : 16/12/2018 - 22:47 (GMT)
To : [hidden email]
Subject : Re: Equinox and Solstice Dates in Calendars

Karl—

.

You wrote:

.

[quote]

Note that the first variation, which is based on the Southern Solstice would for a couple of thousand years at least have a considerably longer mean year than 365.2422 days (currently about 365.2427 days).

[/quote]

.

Yes, but I like the mean-tropical year, because it gives best minimum accuracy throughout a year, and because it’s more familiar to people, and easier to find the length of on the Internet.


KARL REPLIES:  That's OK, if you accept the fact that the southern solstice will move up to about 3 days from the desired time.

.

.

[quote]

Is Michael aware that this year would be a leap year? 

[/quote]

.

Yes, this is a leapyear in 5&4 SC, and in 28&14, if the year starts on the Monday that’s closest to the (midnight-to-midnight) day containing the desired-time.


That year-start rule is a version of the general class of Nearest-Monday year-start rules.


But I’m using the following version:


The year starts on the Monday that starts at the midnight that’s closest to the desired-time.


That rule is more accurate—Its year starts closer to the desired-time.


The version that you used, the one that starts the year on the Monday closest to the day that contains the desired-time, has the following advantages:


KARL REPLIES: I never used such a rule.  I used exactly the one Michael described, assuming the the desired time is within minutes of the southern solstice. I just gave the actual ranges of the equinoxes and solstices in days, like I did for my Week and Month calendar. They do not form part of any calendar rules.


Thursday noon is critical, if the desired time occurs before Thursday noon, then the previous Monday is new year's day. If it occurs after Thursday noon, then next Monday is the new year. If the rule Michael thought I used were used, this critical time would be delayed 12 hours and today would be new year's day and this new year would have a leap week.



Early South  Week 2  Sunday  (5&4 SC version 1)

South1  Week 2  Sunday (5&4 SC version 2)

2018-W50-7  (ISO WeekDate)

2018-W51-7  (South-Solstice WeekDate)

December 16th  (Roman-Gregorian)

Sunday Beta December (Week & Month)


KARL ASKS: If this year has a leap week, why is that week W51? I'd expect it to be W52 and the leap week to begin today.


Karl


Monday Gamma December 2018



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Equinox and Solstice Dates in Calendars

Michael Ossipoff

Karl—

.

You wrote:

.

[quote]

“Note that the first variation, which is based on the Southern Solstice would for a couple of thousand years at least have a considerably longer mean year than 365.2422 days (currently about 365.2427 days).”--Karl

.

“Yes, but I like the mean-tropical year, because it gives best minimum accuracy throughout a year, and because it’s more familiar to people, and easier to find the length of on the Internet.”—Michael

.

KARL REPLIES:  That's OK, if you accept the fact that the southern solstice will move up to about 3 days from the desired time.

[/quote]

.

After how many millennia?

.

You must realize that if you use, as reference-tropical-year (RTA),  the length of the tropical year measured from some one solar ecliptic longitude, then the maximum calendrical-displacement, over the years, will be greater than it would be if the mean-tropical-year is used.

.

Using the length of the tropical year measured from some one solar ecliptic longitude as RTA is fine, if you accept the larger max displacement.  

.

A calendar will be used all year, and its accuracy throughout the year is of interest. That’s a reason to use the mean-tropical year.

.

But I agree that the North Solstice tropical year has its appeal, for the reason that I spoke of in my previous post, and I’d like it too. 

.

There’s nothing wrong with choosing one particular ecliptic cardinal point (solstice or equinox) as the place where you want to maximize calendrical accuracy and freedom from millennial drift.   …and I’d be pleased with such a choice, especially the North Solstice, for which the tropical-year-length has recently entered a long stable period.

.

As I always emphasize, I’d like whatever other people like.

.

[quote]

 

“Is Michael aware that this year would be a leap year?”--Karl 

.

“Yes, this is a leapyear in 5&4 SC, and in 28&14, if the year starts on the Monday that’s closest to the (midnight-to-midnight) day containing the desired-time.

.

That year-start rule is a version of the general class of Nearest-Monday year-start rules.

.

But I’m using the following version:

.

The year starts on the Monday that starts at the midnight that’s closest to the desired-time.

.

That rule is more accurate—Its year starts closer to the desired-time.

.

The version that you used, the one that starts the year on the Monday closest to the day that contains the desired-time, has the following advantages:…”—Michael

[/quote]

.

KARL REPLIES: I never used such a rule.  I used exactly the one Michael described

[/quote]

.

I described two rules.  When you said “Is Michael aware that this year would be a leap year?”, I assumed that you meant that this year would be a leapyear by some version of Nearest Monday, based on the South Solstice.

.

(..because that’s what I’d specified for 28&14 and 5&4 SC.)

.

Understandably, I assumed that you were using a version of Nearest-Monday on which to base that above-quoted statement. Forgive me if I was wrong about that, and if you were using something else altogether that isn’t Nearest-Monday.

.

As I described, by one such version of Nearest-Monday, this year is a leapyear, and by the other version, this year isn’t a leapyear.

.

Anyway, as I said, by the Nearest-Monday version that I used, this year is not a leapyear.  To repeat, here is the Nearest-Monday version that I used:

.

The year starts with the Monday that starts on the midnight that’s closest to the intended-time.

.

(I’ve sometimes called it “the desired-point”, but “intended-time” is what I mean to call it.  In the case of these calendars (28&14 and 5&4 SC), the intended-time is either the actual South-Solstice, or else the end of the most recent of a sequence of Y-day intervals.    …where the first interval of that sequence started on some specified instance of South-Solstice.  Let’s say that it’s the latter, and that the specified instance of South-Solstice is that of Roman-Gregorian 2017, and that Y = 365.2422 days.)

.

[quote]

…, assuming the the desired time is within minutes of the southern solstice. I just gave the actual ranges of the equinoxes and solstices in days, like I did for my Week and Month calendar. They do not form part of any calendar rules.

[/quote]

.

I wasn’t referring to your ranges of equinoxes and solstices, but only to your statement that this year is a leapyear by my year-start rule.

.

I’d posted:

.

[quote]

Early South  Week 2  Sunday  (5&4 SC version 1)

South1  Week 2  Sunday (5&4 SC version 2)

2018-W50-7  (ISO WeekDate)

2018-W51-7  (South-Solstice WeekDate)

December 16th  (Roman-Gregorian)

.

[quote]

KARL ASKS: If this year has a leap week…

[/quote]

.

This year doesn’t have a leap-week.  As I mentioned above, I used the following rule:

.

The year starts with the Monday that starts on the midnight that’s closest to the intended-time.

.

By that rule, based on the South Solstice (actually, or by the arithmetic rule using Y), this year is not a leapyear.

.

[quote]

, why is that week W51?

[/quote]

.

Because, at the time of that posting, it was the 51st week, starting at the Monday specified by the above-stated Nearest-Monday version.

.

…and it would still have been, even if there were going to be a leap-week (but there isn’t going to be one this year).

.

[quote]

I'd expect it to be W52 and the leap week to begin today.

[/quote]

.

By South-Solstice WeekDate, W52 starts today (…but not yesterday when I posted the dates-list that you quoted above.)

.

W52 when it was Roman-Gregorian December 16th?   

.

Then one of us has made an error in determining whether this year is a leapyear by the Nearest-Monday version that I specified, and one of us has made an error in determining which week this is, measured from the Monday specified by that Nearest-Monday version for this year.

.

Yesterday, December 16th Roman-Gregorian, it was week 51, for South-Solstice WeekDate.  But today, it’s now week 52 for South-Solstice WeekDate.

.

I think that the dates-list that you quoted above was at the bottom of a post that I posted when it was still Roman-Gregorian December 16th in Greenwich.  If I posted it after the date changed in Greenwich, then of course I should have advanced all the dates accordingly.

.

But all the dates in that dates-list are for the day that was the Roman-Gregorian Calendar’s December 16th.

.

Early-South  Week 3  Monday  (5&4 SC version 1)

South1  Week 3  Monday (5&4 SC version 2)

2018-W51-1  (ISO WeekDate)

2018-W52-1  (South-Solstice WeekDate)

Southward3  Week 4  Monday  (28&4)

December 17th  (Roman-Gregorian)

December 18th (Hanke-Henry)

.

Michael Ossipoff

 

 

 

 

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Equinox and Solstice Dates in Calendars

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

It is evident that Michael's set of calendars is too complicated to easily understand and I'll give up attempting to do so. If any other calendar person understands them, they are welcome to explain.

Karl

Monday Gamma December 2018 
----Original message----
From : [hidden email]
Date : 17/12/2018 - 15:36 (GMT)
To : [hidden email]
Subject : Re: Equinox and Solstice Dates in Calendars

Karl—

.

You wrote:

.

[quote]

“Note that the first variation, which is based on the Southern Solstice would for a couple of thousand years at least have a considerably longer mean year than 365.2422 days (currently about 365.2427 days).”--Karl

.

“Yes, but I like the mean-tropical year, because it gives best minimum accuracy throughout a year, and because it’s more familiar to people, and easier to find the length of on the Internet.”—Michael

.

KARL REPLIES:  That's OK, if you accept the fact that the southern solstice will move up to about 3 days from the desired time.

[/quote]

.

After how many millennia?

.

You must realize that if you use, as reference-tropical-year (RTA),  the length of the tropical year measured from some one solar ecliptic longitude, then the maximum calendrical-displacement, over the years, will be greater than it would be if the mean-tropical-year is used.

.

Using the length of the tropical year measured from some one solar ecliptic longitude as RTA is fine, if you accept the larger max displacement.  

.

A calendar will be used all year, and its accuracy throughout the year is of interest. That’s a reason to use the mean-tropical year.

.

But I agree that the North Solstice tropical year has its appeal, for the reason that I spoke of in my previous post, and I’d like it too. 

.

There’s nothing wrong with choosing one particular ecliptic cardinal point (solstice or equinox) as the place where you want to maximize calendrical accuracy and freedom from millennial drift.   …and I’d be pleased with such a choice, especially the North Solstice, for which the tropical-year-length has recently entered a long stable period.

.

As I always emphasize, I’d like whatever other people like.

.

[quote]

 

“Is Michael aware that this year would be a leap year?”--Karl 

.

“Yes, this is a leapyear in 5&4 SC, and in 28&14, if the year starts on the Monday that’s closest to the (midnight-to-midnight) day containing the desired-time.

.

That year-start rule is a version of the general class of Nearest-Monday year-start rules.

.

But I’m using the following version:

.

The year starts on the Monday that starts at the midnight that’s closest to the desired-time.

.

That rule is more accurate—Its year starts closer to the desired-time.

.

The version that you used, the one that starts the year on the Monday closest to the day that contains the desired-time, has the following advantages:…”—Michael

[/quote]

.

KARL REPLIES: I never used such a rule.  I used exactly the one Michael described

[/quote]

.

I described two rules.  When you said “Is Michael aware that this year would be a leap year?”, I assumed that you meant that this year would be a leapyear by some version of Nearest Monday, based on the South Solstice.

.

(..because that’s what I’d specified for 28&14 and 5&4 SC.)

.

Understandably, I assumed that you were using a version of Nearest-Monday on which to base that above-quoted statement. Forgive me if I was wrong about that, and if you were using something else altogether that isn’t Nearest-Monday.

.

As I described, by one such version of Nearest-Monday, this year is a leapyear, and by the other version, this year isn’t a leapyear.

.

Anyway, as I said, by the Nearest-Monday version that I used, this year is not a leapyear.  To repeat, here is the Nearest-Monday version that I used:

.

The year starts with the Monday that starts on the midnight that’s closest to the intended-time.

.

(I’ve sometimes called it “the desired-point”, but “intended-time” is what I mean to call it.  In the case of these calendars (28&14 and 5&4 SC), the intended-time is either the actual South-Solstice, or else the end of the most recent of a sequence of Y-day intervals.    …where the first interval of that sequence started on some specified instance of South-Solstice.  Let’s say that it’s the latter, and that the specified instance of South-Solstice is that of Roman-Gregorian 2017, and that Y = 365.2422 days.)

.

[quote]

…, assuming the the desired time is within minutes of the southern solstice. I just gave the actual ranges of the equinoxes and solstices in days, like I did for my Week and Month calendar. They do not form part of any calendar rules.

[/quote]

.

I wasn’t referring to your ranges of equinoxes and solstices, but only to your statement that this year is a leapyear by my year-start rule.

.

I’d posted:

.

[quote]

Early South  Week 2  Sunday  (5&4 SC version 1)

South1  Week 2  Sunday (5&4 SC version 2)

2018-W50-7  (ISO WeekDate)

2018-W51-7  (South-Solstice WeekDate)

December 16th  (Roman-Gregorian)

.

[quote]

KARL ASKS: If this year has a leap week…

[/quote]

.

This year doesn’t have a leap-week.  As I mentioned above, I used the following rule:

.

The year starts with the Monday that starts on the midnight that’s closest to the intended-time.

.

By that rule, based on the South Solstice (actually, or by the arithmetic rule using Y), this year is not a leapyear.

.

[quote]

, why is that week W51?

[/quote]

.

Because, at the time of that posting, it was the 51st week, starting at the Monday specified by the above-stated Nearest-Monday version.

.

…and it would still have been, even if there were going to be a leap-week (but there isn’t going to be one this year).

.

[quote]

I'd expect it to be W52 and the leap week to begin today.

[/quote]

.

By South-Solstice WeekDate, W52 starts today (…but not yesterday when I posted the dates-list that you quoted above.)

.

W52 when it was Roman-Gregorian December 16th?   

.

Then one of us has made an error in determining whether this year is a leapyear by the Nearest-Monday version that I specified, and one of us has made an error in determining which week this is, measured from the Monday specified by that Nearest-Monday version for this year.

.

Yesterday, December 16th Roman-Gregorian, it was week 51, for South-Solstice WeekDate.  But today, it’s now week 52 for South-Solstice WeekDate.

.

I think that the dates-list that you quoted above was at the bottom of a post that I posted when it was still Roman-Gregorian December 16th in Greenwich.  If I posted it after the date changed in Greenwich, then of course I should have advanced all the dates accordingly.

.

But all the dates in that dates-list are for the day that was the Roman-Gregorian Calendar’s December 16th.

.

Early-South  Week 3  Monday  (5&4 SC version 1)

South1  Week 3  Monday (5&4 SC version 2)

2018-W51-1  (ISO WeekDate)

2018-W52-1  (South-Solstice WeekDate)

Southward3  Week 4  Monday  (28&4)

December 17th  (Roman-Gregorian)

December 18th (Hanke-Henry)

.

Michael Ossipoff

 

 

 

 



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Equinox and Solstice Dates in Calendars

Michael Ossipoff

Karl says:

.

[quote]

It is evident that Michael's set of calendars is too complicated to easily understand

[/quote]

.

This isn’t the first time for you.  It’s a bit presumptuous, when you say that whatever you don’t understand (yet, at least) is too complicated.

.

I’ve carefully, explicitly, explained the versions of Nearest-Monday. In particular, I’ve repeatedly explained them to you. You didn’t say which particular part of the wording you didn’t understand the meaning of.

.

Complicated?  On the contrary, Nearest-Monday is the most briefly-stated, naturally and obviously motivated and justified, way to describe and define a class of minimum-displacement year-start rules.  

.

(The ISO’s Nearest-Monday version isn’t minimum-displacement, because it incorporates a Gregorian result, but it nevertheless has low maximum periodic cyclical displacement.)

.

Likewise, I’ve quite explicitly defined the month-systems that I’ve proposed.

.

I’ve always been willing to explain something further, if needed, to someone who does their part, by specifying exactly which word, phrase, term, etc. they don’t understand the meaning of. If you can’t or won’t do that, then I can’t help you.

.

Alright, so you made some error that led you to say that this year is a leapyear with the Nearest-Monday version that I specified. No need to make a big deal about it. So you made an error. Errors happen. Accept it.

.

I tried to explain your error by pointing out that this _would_ be a leapyear by a Nearest-Monday version different from the one that I specified. So I suggested that you inadvertently use the wrong version. You say that isn’t how the error happened. Fine. Then I can’t tell you how you erred.

.

Though the Nearest-Monday class of year-start rule is briefly-defined, simple, and obviously and naturally motivated and justified, that doesn’t mean that it’s possible to guarantee that you won’t have trouble with some calculations that use it, especially if you work carelessly.

.

Look, in mathematics and science, for example, there’ve been simple laws or principles whose application resulted in quite complicated, involved, and difficult calculations.  So don’t take your leap-year error as meaning that my Nearest-Monday definitions are complicated. (I still suggest that you just used the wrong version.)

.

You likely could get the solution right if you worked at it. You’re too impatient if you get angry, critical and discouraged if you don’t get it right the first time you try it. But of course it’s your business, and none of my business, if you choose to give up on it.  After all, you’re under no obligation to solve calendrical problems regarding someone else’s calendar-proposal.  So, of course, feel free to let it go.

.

But this suggests that the more conveniently-implemented version of Nearest-Monday might be a more practical proposal if people want to verify the calculations more easily. That’s the version that says:

.

The year starts with the Monday that’s closest to the day that contains the intended-time

.

But, as I said, because I’ve been using, for posted dates, the slightly more accurate, and slightly wordier (and more involved to implement) version, the one that says:

.

The year starts with the Monday that starts on the midnight that’s closest to the intended-time…

.

…then therefore of course that’s the one that I should continue to use for any dates that I post.

.

[quote]

…and I'll give up attempting to do so.

[/quote]

.

Suit yourself.

.

[quote]

If any other calendar person understands them, they are welcome to explain.

[/quote]

.

3rd-party interpretations aren’t likely to help your understanding.  It’s best that proposals be explained by their proponent, and I’ve done so explicitly.  …but, as I’ve said, I’ve always been willing to answer specific questions about meanings of particular sentences, words, phrases and terms…when the questioner is willing to specify such.  

.

Just saying, “That’s too complicated. I don’t understand it.” doesn’t tell me which part you don’t understand, and, as I said, then it isn’t possible to help you.

.

Anyway, remember that most likely there won’t be any calendar-reform anyway, so the whole topic of calendar-reform is science-fiction.

.

You’re making a negativity-issue about it, and that isn’t necessary.                

.

I get that you don’t like 28&14 or 5&4 SC.  That’s okay…really.  For one thing, as I’ve been saying, they’re both proposals for a hypothetical (very unlikely to come-to-pass) time when people want a complete break with the past.  That’s even more unlikely than the vanishingly-unlikely prospect of any calendar-reform at all.

.

My proposals have a 7-day week, no blank-days, and our current year-numbering, but there’s no guarantee that the population, in that hypothetical future time, would choose such.

.

Additionally, even in that unlikely hypothetical circumstance, obviously the population as a whole would like some proposal, and the adopted calendar would be something that they like. If you don’t like 28&14 or 5&4 SC, maybe others, too, wouldn’t.

.

In the above-stated circumstance, I’d suggest an astronomical-terrestrial seasonal calendar.   …one that recognizes 6 seasons and whose months all start on the same day-of-the-week.  28&14 and 5&4 SC are such proposals.  That would just be my own suggestion, and I make no claim that anyone else would agree.

.

It goes without saying that there’s no way to guess what people, at such a time, would like or want.

.

As I’ve always emphasized, I’d like any calendar proposal that the population-as-a-whole like.

.

If people couldn’t agree on any month-system—couldn’t find any month system that isn’t unacceptable to some, then the obvious (at least preliminary) choice would be South-Solstice WeekDate. Then people could further discuss month-systems, and choose one only if there’s one that isn’t unacceptable to many..

.

It is to be emphasized that the whole subject of calendar-reform is hypothetical…is science-fiction. 

.

Early-South  Week 3  Monday  (5&4 SC version 1)

South1  Week 3  Monday (5&4 SC version 2)

2018-W51-1  (ISO WeekDate)

2018-W52-1  (South-Solstice WeekDate)

Southward3  Week 4  Monday  (28&4)

December 17th  (Roman-Gregorian)

December 18th (Hanke-Henry)

.

Michael Ossipoff

 


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Equinox and Solstice Dates in Calendars

Christoph Päper-2
In reply to this post by k.palmen@btinternet.com
K PALMEN:
>
> It is evident that Michael's set of calendars is too complicated to
> easily understand and I'll give up attempting to do so. If any other
> calendar person understands them, they are welcome to explain.

If I currently did have the time and motivation to collect the information scattered over dozens of messages, I probably would have added the calendars to the wiki. Perhaps Michael wants to do this himself. http://calendars.wikia.com
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Equinox and Solstice Dates in Calendars

Michael Ossipoff

The information is repeated in lots of messages, but there are several messages such that each of them completely defines 28&14 or 5&4.   SC. 

There are several messages each of which completely defines the Nearest-Monday class of year-start rule and its versions. And that's completely defined in some of the messages that define 28&

But yes, that's a good idea, to add it to the calendar-wiki   Will do.

Michael Ossipoff


On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 4:35 PM Christoph Päper <[hidden email]> wrote:
K PALMEN:
>
> It is evident that Michael's set of calendars is too complicated to
> easily understand and I'll give up attempting to do so. If any other
> calendar person understands them, they are welcome to explain.

If I currently did have the time and motivation to collect the information scattered over dozens of messages, I probably would have added the calendars to the wiki. Perhaps Michael wants to do this himself. http://calendars.wikia.com
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Equinox and Solstice Dates in Calendars

Michael Ossipoff

Today my computer’s malfunctioning took the form of sending e-mails for which I haven’t clicked “send”.  That’s why an incomplete message was sent to CALNDR-L twice.

.

All I meant to say was that there are several messages each of which completely define 28&14 or 5&4 SC. And several messages that completely define the Nearest-Monday class of year-start rules and its versions.

.

…sometimes in a message that also defines one of the abovementioned month-systems.


I've not hesitated to re-post my definitions in many replies--and each is complete for one of the month-systems or Nearest-Monday.

.

Thanks for the suggestion. I’ll add South-Solstice WeekDate, 28&14, and 5&4 SC to the Calendar Wiki.

.

Speaking of distributed definitions, I’d like to say that I think, for 5&4 SC, I’ll transfer a week from Spring1 (also called Northward1) to Pre-Spring.  (…and, for symmetry, likewise from Autumn1 to Pre-Autumn.). Of course that has no effect on the dates that I've been posting for this time of year.

.

That’s partly because my experience suggests that April isn’t just Spring—At least in some places, it also includes a lot of _waiting for_ Spring. The week-transfer I intend delays Nominal Spring a week. 

.

Also, when Spenser wrote about what April was like, of course the best guess (only a guess, because whole months are an imprecise way of designating time) is that he literally meant to refer to his Julian April when he described April.     …which would mean that he was talking about (roughly) the last 2/3 of our April and the 1st 1/3 of our May.

.

A bonus that comes with that is that the 544 pattern is repeated throughout the year.   …allowing me to change the name of 5&4 SC to something a bit clearer:  544 SC.

.

Early-South  Week 3  Tuesday  (5&4 SC version 1)

South1  Week 3  Tuesday (5&4 SC version 2)

2018-W51-2  (ISO WeekDate)

2018-W52-2  (South-Solstice WeekDate)

Southward3  Week 4  Tuesday  (28&4)

December 18th  (Roman-Gregorian)

December 19th (Hanke-Henry)

 

.

Michael Ossipoff

 

 

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Equinox and Solstice Dates in Calendars

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

I found I made an error with the Southern Solstice this year, which made me reckon incorrectly that this year is a leap year according to Michael's year start rule. I had thought the solstice was on Thursday rather than Friday and so this year is a leap year, when in fact last year was a leap year. This makes W52 correct for this week when I had thought it would be W53. Apologies for any confusion caused by this error. 

Calculations were made in UT (GMT). In EST, this year would have a leap week this week, because the previous Southern Solstice would occur before noon on Thursday so causing the year to begin on the previous Monday.

Here I give the two Southern Solstice Times for this year:
Thu, 21 Dec 2017 16:27:50 GMT
Fri, 21 Dec 2018 22:21:51 GMT

I gave up trying to understand Michael when he seemed to state he had two different year start rules, which were not clearly named.

Karl
----Original message----
From : [hidden email]
Date : 17/12/2018 - 19:32 (GMT)
To : [hidden email]
Subject : Re: Equinox and Solstice Dates in Calendars

Karl says:

.

[quote]

It is evident that Michael's set of calendars is too complicated to easily understand

[/quote]

.

This isn’t the first time for you.  It’s a bit presumptuous, when you say that whatever you don’t understand (yet, at least) is too complicated.

.

I’ve carefully, explicitly, explained the versions of Nearest-Monday. In particular, I’ve repeatedly explained them to you. You didn’t say which particular part of the wording you didn’t understand the meaning of.

.

Complicated?  On the contrary, Nearest-Monday is the most briefly-stated, naturally and obviously motivated and justified, way to describe and define a class of minimum-displacement year-start rules.  

.

(The ISO’s Nearest-Monday version isn’t minimum-displacement, because it incorporates a Gregorian result, but it nevertheless has low maximum periodic cyclical displacement.)

.

Likewise, I’ve quite explicitly defined the month-systems that I’ve proposed.

.

I’ve always been willing to explain something further, if needed, to someone who does their part, by specifying exactly which word, phrase, term, etc. they don’t understand the meaning of. If you can’t or won’t do that, then I can’t help you.

.

Alright, so you made some error that led you to say that this year is a leapyear with the Nearest-Monday version that I specified. No need to make a big deal about it. So you made an error. Errors happen. Accept it.

.

I tried to explain your error by pointing out that this _would_ be a leapyear by a Nearest-Monday version different from the one that I specified. So I suggested that you inadvertently use the wrong version. You say that isn’t how the error happened. Fine. Then I can’t tell you how you erred.

.

Though the Nearest-Monday class of year-start rule is briefly-defined, simple, and obviously and naturally motivated and justified, that doesn’t mean that it’s possible to guarantee that you won’t have trouble with some calculations that use it, especially if you work carelessly.

.

Look, in mathematics and science, for example, there’ve been simple laws or principles whose application resulted in quite complicated, involved, and difficult calculations.  So don’t take your leap-year error as meaning that my Nearest-Monday definitions are complicated. (I still suggest that you just used the wrong version.)

.

You likely could get the solution right if you worked at it. You’re too impatient if you get angry, critical and discouraged if you don’t get it right the first time you try it. But of course it’s your business, and none of my business, if you choose to give up on it.  After all, you’re under no obligation to solve calendrical problems regarding someone else’s calendar-proposal.  So, of course, feel free to let it go.

.

But this suggests that the more conveniently-implemented version of Nearest-Monday might be a more practical proposal if people want to verify the calculations more easily. That’s the version that says:

.

The year starts with the Monday that’s closest to the day that contains the intended-time

.

But, as I said, because I’ve been using, for posted dates, the slightly more accurate, and slightly wordier (and more involved to implement) version, the one that says:

.

The year starts with the Monday that starts on the midnight that’s closest to the intended-time…

.

…then therefore of course that’s the one that I should continue to use for any dates that I post.

.

[quote]

…and I'll give up attempting to do so.

[/quote]

.

Suit yourself.

.

[quote]

If any other calendar person understands them, they are welcome to explain.

[/quote]

.

3rd-party interpretations aren’t likely to help your understanding.  It’s best that proposals be explained by their proponent, and I’ve done so explicitly.  …but, as I’ve said, I’ve always been willing to answer specific questions about meanings of particular sentences, words, phrases and terms…when the questioner is willing to specify such.  

.

Just saying, “That’s too complicated. I don’t understand it.” doesn’t tell me which part you don’t understand, and, as I said, then it isn’t possible to help you.

.

Anyway, remember that most likely there won’t be any calendar-reform anyway, so the whole topic of calendar-reform is science-fiction.

.

You’re making a negativity-issue about it, and that isn’t necessary.                

.

I get that you don’t like 28&14 or 5&4 SC.  That’s okay…really.  For one thing, as I’ve been saying, they’re both proposals for a hypothetical (very unlikely to come-to-pass) time when people want a complete break with the past.  That’s even more unlikely than the vanishingly-unlikely prospect of any calendar-reform at all.

.

My proposals have a 7-day week, no blank-days, and our current year-numbering, but there’s no guarantee that the population, in that hypothetical future time, would choose such.

.

Additionally, even in that unlikely hypothetical circumstance, obviously the population as a whole would like some proposal, and the adopted calendar would be something that they like. If you don’t like 28&14 or 5&4 SC, maybe others, too, wouldn’t.

.

In the above-stated circumstance, I’d suggest an astronomical-terrestrial seasonal calendar.   …one that recognizes 6 seasons and whose months all start on the same day-of-the-week.  28&14 and 5&4 SC are such proposals.  That would just be my own suggestion, and I make no claim that anyone else would agree.

.

It goes without saying that there’s no way to guess what people, at such a time, would like or want.

.

As I’ve always emphasized, I’d like any calendar proposal that the population-as-a-whole like.

.

If people couldn’t agree on any month-system—couldn’t find any month system that isn’t unacceptable to some, then the obvious (at least preliminary) choice would be South-Solstice WeekDate. Then people could further discuss month-systems, and choose one only if there’s one that isn’t unacceptable to many..

.

It is to be emphasized that the whole subject of calendar-reform is hypothetical…is science-fiction. 

.

Early-South  Week 3  Monday  (5&4 SC version 1)

South1  Week 3  Monday (5&4 SC version 2)

2018-W51-1  (ISO WeekDate)

2018-W52-1  (South-Solstice WeekDate)

Southward3  Week 4  Monday  (28&4)

December 17th  (Roman-Gregorian)

December 18th (Hanke-Henry)

.

Michael Ossipoff

 




Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Equinox and Solstice Dates in Calendars

Peter Meyer
In reply to this post by k.palmen@btinternet.com
Michael's insulting reply to Karl (below) demonstrates clearly that
Michael is an arrogant pig.

No, no!  Sorry!  I take that back!  Pigs are intelligent animals.

> From : [hidden email] (Michael Ossipoff)
> Date : 17/12/2018 - 19:32 (GMT)
> To : [hidden email]
> Subject : Re: Equinox and Solstice Dates in Calendars
>
> Karl says:
> .
> [quote]
> It is evident that Michael's set of
> calendars is too complicated to easily understand
> [/quote]
> .
> This isn’t the first time for you
> It’s a bit presumptuous, when you
> say that whatever you don’t understand (yet, at least) is too complicated.
> .
> I’ve carefully, explicitly,
> explained the versions of Nearest-Monday. In particular, I’ve repeatedly
> explained them to you. You didn’t say which particular part of the
> wording you didn’t understand the meaning of.
> .
> Complicated?  On the contrary, Nearest-Monday is the most
> briefly-stated, naturally and obviously motivated and justified, way to
> describe and define a class of minimum-displacement year-start rules.
> .
> (The ISO’s Nearest-Monday version
> isn’t minimum-displacement, because it incorporates a Gregorian
> result, but it
> nevertheless has low maximum periodic cyclical displacement.)
> .
> Likewise, I’ve quite explicitly
> defined the month-systems that I’ve proposed.
> .
> I’ve always been willing to explain
> something further, if needed, to someone who does their part, by specifying
> exactly which word, phrase, term, etc. they don’t understand the
> meaning of. If you can’t or won’t do that, then I can’t help
> you.
> .
> Alright, so you made some error that
> led you to say that this year is a leapyear with the Nearest-Monday version
> that I specified. No need to make a big deal about it. So you made an
> error. Errors happen. Accept it.
> .
> I tried to explain your error by
> pointing out that this _would_ be a leapyear by a Nearest-Monday version
> different from the one that I specified. So I suggested that you
> inadvertently
> use the wrong version. You say that isn’t how the error happened.
> Fine. Then I can’t tell you how you erred.
> .
> Though the Nearest-Monday class of
> year-start rule is briefly-defined, simple, and obviously and naturally
> motivated and justified, that doesn’t mean that it’s possible to
> guarantee that
> you won’t have trouble with some calculations that use it,
> especially if you work carelessly.
> .
> Look, in mathematics and science, for
> example, there’ve been simple laws or principles whose application
> resulted in
> quite complicated, involved, and difficult calculations.  So don’t
> take your leap-year error as meaning
> that my Nearest-Monday definitions are complicated. (I still suggest
> that you just used the wrong version.)
> .
> You likely could get the solution
> right if you worked at it. You’re too impatient if you get angry,
> critical and
> discouraged if you don’t get it right the first time you try it.
> But of course
> it’s your business, and none of my business, if you choose to give up on
> it.  After all, you’re under no
> obligation to solve calendrical problems regarding someone else’s
> calendar-proposal.  So, of course, feel free to let it go.
> .
> But this suggests that the more
> conveniently-implemented version of Nearest-Monday might be a more practical
> proposal if people want to verify the calculations more easily. That’s the
> version that says:
> .
> The year starts with the Monday that’s
> closest to the day that contains the intended-time
> .
> But, as I said, because I’ve been
> using, for posted dates, the slightly more accurate, and slightly
> wordier (and
> more involved to implement) version, the one that says:
> .
> The year starts with the Monday that
> starts on the midnight that’s closest to the intended-time…
> .
> …then therefore of course that’s the
> one that I should continue to use for any dates that I post.
> .
> [quote]
> …and I'll give up attempting to do
> so.
> [/quote]
> .
> Suit yourself.
> .
> [quote]
> If any other calendar person
> understands them, they are welcome to explain.
> [/quote]
> .
> 3rd-party interpretations
> aren’t likely to help your understanding.
> It’s best that proposals be explained by their proponent, and I’ve done
> so explicitly.  …but, as I’ve said, I’ve
> always been willing to answer specific questions about meanings of particular
> sentences, words, phrases and terms…when the questioner is willing
> to specify such.
> .
> Just saying, “That’s too
> complicated. I don’t understand it.” doesn’t tell me which part
> you don’t
> understand, and, as I said, then it isn’t possible to help you.
> .
> Anyway, remember that most likely
> there won’t be any calendar-reform anyway, so the whole topic of
> calendar-reform is science-fiction.
> .
> You’re making a
> negativity-issue about it, and that isn’t necessary.
> .
> I get that you don’t
> like 28&14 or 5&4 SC.  That’s
> okay…really.  For one thing, as I’ve been
> saying, they’re both proposals for a hypothetical (very unlikely to
> come-to-pass) time when people want a complete break with the past.  
> That’s even more unlikely than the
> vanishingly-unlikely prospect of any calendar-reform at all.
> .
> My proposals have
> a 7-day week, no blank-days, and our current year-numbering, but there’s no
> guarantee that the population, in that hypothetical future time, would choose
> such.
> .
> Additionally, even
> in that unlikely hypothetical circumstance, obviously the population
> as a whole
> would like some proposal, and the adopted calendar would be something
> that they
> like. If you don’t like 28&14 or 5&4 SC, maybe others, too, wouldn’t.
> .
> In the
> above-stated circumstance, I’d suggest an astronomical-terrestrial seasonal
> calendar.   …one that recognizes 6
> seasons and whose months all start on the same day-of-the-week.  
> 28&14 and 5&4 SC are such
> proposals.  That would just be my own
> suggestion, and I make no claim that anyone else would agree.
> .
> It goes without
> saying that there’s no way to guess what people, at such a time,
> would like or want.
> .
> As I’ve always
> emphasized, I’d like any calendar proposal that the
> population-as-a-whole like.
> .
> If people couldn’t
> agree on any month-system—couldn’t find any month system that isn’t
> unacceptable to some, then the obvious (at least preliminary) choice would be
> South-Solstice WeekDate. Then people could further discuss month-systems, and
> choose one only if there’s one that isn’t unacceptable to many..
> .
> It is to be emphasized that the whole
> subject of calendar-reform is hypothetical…is science-fiction.
> .
> Early-South  Week 3  Monday
> (5&4 SC version 1)
> South1  Week 3  Monday
> (5&4 SC version 2)
> 2018-W51-1  (ISO WeekDate)
> 2018-W52-1  (South-Solstice
> WeekDate)
> Southward3  Week 4
> Monday  (28&4)
> December 17th  (Roman-Gregorian)
> December 18th (Hanke-Henry)
> .
> Michael Ossipoff
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Equinox and Solstice Dates in Calendars

Michael Ossipoff
In reply to this post by k.palmen@btinternet.com

I gave up trying to understand Michael when he seemed to state he had two different year start rules, which were not clearly named.

I named the general class of Nearest-Monday year-start rules. Though I didn't name the various versions, I not only described them, but I defined them in outline-form. And I clearly specified which one my proposals use.

Karl has very-many time given up on understanding me.  Couldn't he just save a lot of trouble by giving up once and for all? 

...not that it isn't considerate for Karl to inform us every time he gives up on understanding me.

Early-South  Week 3  Tuesday  (5&4 SC version 1)

South1  Week 3  Tuesday (5&4 SC version 2)

2018-W51-2  (ISO WeekDate)

2018-W52-2  (South-Solstice WeekDate)

Southward3  Week 4  Tuesday  (28&4)

December 18th  (Roman-Gregorian)

December 19th (Hanke-Henry)


Michael Ossipoff



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

One World One Calendar Re:Equinox and Solstice Dates in Calendars

Brij Bhushan metric VIJ
Michael Ossipoff, Cc sirs:
I have been ‘lost as to who is THE ONE PERSON’ considered as the “authority” on Reform, if desired, on calendars. I do notice quite a pull-push and/or claimants to be the original authors of any proposed calendar. 
What is the Reform of Gregorian Calendar aimed at. 
image1.jpeg
My efforts, though insignificant, since 1971 June 06 - the date birth of my grand-daughter after 25 years (1996) is 
coincident. Who is Chris Carrierr (forgive me if mis-spelt) - the claimant of my 128-year cycle plan getting mixed with my 7*128=896-year UNIQUE & EXACT Cycle as discussed presenting my format as that of the SIMPLEST, SUREST and CHEAPEST ever proposal on ‘just shifting one day’ to meet the known requirements for any Calendar. 
I am aware, I may NEVER get the approval/ acceptance of my ‘individual tryst’ against my destiny: yet I am satisfied I have made an atttmpt. Regards to all members of listserv,.. 
In about an hour & half it would be time for me to wish my grandson birth date event.
Ex-Flt Lt Brij Bhushan (Metric) VIJ, Retd.,IAF
BRIJ-Gregorian Modified Calendar
Tuesday,2018 December 18H22:42(decimal)

Sent from my iPhone

On Dec 18, 2018, at 07:37, Michael Ossipoff <[hidden email]> wrote:


I gave up trying to understand Michael when he seemed to state he had two different year start rules, which were not clearly named.

I named the general class of Nearest-Monday year-start rules. Though I didn't name the various versions, I not only described them, but I defined them in outline-form. And I clearly specified which one my proposals use.

Karl has very-many time given up on understanding me.  Couldn't he just save a lot of trouble by giving up once and for all? 

...not that it isn't considerate for Karl to inform us every time he gives up on understanding me.

Early-South  Week 3  Tuesday  (5&4 SC version 1)

South1  Week 3  Tuesday (5&4 SC version 2)

2018-W51-2  (ISO WeekDate)

2018-W52-2  (South-Solstice WeekDate)

Southward3  Week 4  Tuesday  (28&4)

December 18th  (Roman-Gregorian)

December 19th (Hanke-Henry)


Michael Ossipoff