On Tuesday 01 June 2010 14:32:26 Ron Johnson wrote: > On 06/01/2010 01:41 PM, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote: > > (It may > > not be entirely friendly, but any other behavior will be hard to reason > > about because of inconsistencies.) > > That's why whomever came up with the complete idiocy of breaking up > 52 weeks into 12 irregularly-sized months, days starting in the > middle of the night and years in the middle of winter, should br > brought behind the barn and flayed alive. I think it was a collective work and that most of the key figures are long since dead. I'm open to suggestions on changing it, but there seems to be quite a bit of momentum behind the current system. In addition, we are already working with an astronomical clock that's not synced. (Really? 365.2425 days per year -- what exactly are the prime factors of that again?) I vote for 25 hour days that start as soon as the midpoint of Sol crosses the "ideal" horizon. The duration of a second might need to change. Ideally the number of seconds per hour would remain a square number; it's root would remain the number of seconds per minute and minutes per hour. I vote for months that start on the first day after a "new moon". They'll have 28-29 days, so we'll have about 13 of them a year, but New Year's Day will drift a bit. (Why should January have all the fun, anyway?) -- Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. ,= ,-_-. =. firstname.lastname@example.org ((_/)o o(\_)) ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy `-'(. .)`-' http://iguanasuicide.net/ \_/
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.