|
|
#1
08-18-2007, 02:34 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Metric time
For the hell of it I worked out metric time. Tell me if my calcs are wrong anywhere.
100 days a year 10 hours a day 100 mins an hour 100 seconds a min = 10,000,000 "seconds" a year Boring non metric time 365.25 days a year 24 hours a day 60 mins an hour 60 secs a min = 31,557,600 seconds So a new tomtimeŠ second will have to equal 31,577,600/10,000,000 = 3.15576 boring old non metric seconds. Start updating your clocks and watches guys. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] 
|
|
#4
08-18-2007, 04:15 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Metric time
365.25 ishish to be nitty about such stuff.
But you're probably right. It's not like we can accelerate the rotation speeds and add/subtract mass from this planet. I'm sure it takes a ridiculous amount to effort to induce changes though. Perfectly happy walking on the ball as it is. There's a civilization, vanished quite awhile back, that had a base-48 system, if I recall correctly. Can never remember which one. Babylonian? Who needs watches and clocks when you've got a built-in sundial on your face? In jest, don't mind the soft sarcasm. (It's a neat idea tho.)
|
|
#5
08-20-2007, 12:53 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Metric time
The main problem is that the earths rotation vs a full orbit around the sun do not differ by multiples of ten. We can definitely redefine a year to be 100 days, but then seasons do not line up with the year, i.e. every year is its own season, and these seasons are asynchronous with years instead of all 4 occurring once exactly in each year.
At the root of all metric measurements is some definition. The meter is defined by the speed of light for example. In defining one time metric by two different arbitrary events (one earth orbit and one earth rotation about its axis) you will always be left with some residual fraction part. I like the idea of a 100 day year, cause that lines up a bit more with fiscal quarters, scholarly semesters, etc. But it does mess with the seasons because it isn't compatible with the earth's orbit.
|
|
#6
08-20-2007, 08:24 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Metric time
m_theory:
Once mankind expands and resides throughout the Solar System, what would be the most accurate calendar to synchronize all the linear recording of information? I don't know the answer, fwiw. Just think it's a curious dilemma.
|
|
#7
08-20-2007, 10:29 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Metric time
Well the sun rotates about its axis once every 25 days (at its equator) so I think that would be a good starting point. Obviously if we inhabit multiple planets then basing our calendar on the orbit of one will make the seasons of the other asynchronous. It would be best to clock the rotations of the sun (since the whole solar system can agree on this*). Also 25 days is pretty close to a month's length anyways, which makes it an intuitive amount of time. The year could be a planetary abstraction about time, where we use 'solar months' to specify exactly when something happened invariant of location (i.e. I was born 24,017.55 solar months BCE2).
* staying synchronously timed in the inhabited solar system will be quite a pain in the ass though because of the effects of relativity. Still measuring time from the behavior of the sun would allow travelers to calculate the discrepancy.
|
|
#9
08-20-2007, 10:36 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Metric time
[ QUOTE ]
Well the sun rotates about its axis once every 25 days (at its equator) so I think that would be a good starting point. Obviously if we inhabit multiple planets then basing our calendar on the orbit of one will make the seasons of the other asynchronous. It would be best to clock the rotations of the sun (since the whole solar system can agree on this*). Also 25 days is pretty close to a month's length anyways, which makes it an intuitive amount of time. The year could be a planetary abstraction about time, where we use 'solar months' to specify exactly when something happened invariant of location (i.e. I was born 24,017.55 solar months BCE2). * staying synchronously timed in the inhabited solar system will be quite a pain in the ass though because of the effects of relativity. Still measuring time from the behavior of the sun would allow travelers to calculate the discrepancy. [/ QUOTE ] Problem is that a sun's rotation doesn't have much meaning for us. You can watch sunspots to detect rotation, but that's about it, so it's really just an arbitrary measure. And you're right about relativity issues. I imagine using an atomic clock based on earth (days/years like now) is natural -- at least they have some meaning as earth is our home planet and we've used this standard for thousands of years, so seems as good an arbitrary reference as any.
|
|
#10
08-20-2007, 01:17 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Metric time
Since we are talking about new time systems for the hell of it, I developed a system that would eliminate the need for time zones.
One hour would be the same as it is now, but instead of grouping it into 24 hours per day, it would be 26 hours per yad. People would usually sleep from 00:00 to 08:40, work from 08:40 to 16:20, and have leisure time from 16:20 to 00:00. There would be groups of 7 yads in each keew. people would work for 5 yads, then take 2 yads off. There would be 12 thoms, each would have 28 or 29 yads. There would be 337 yads in common years, and 338 yads in leap years, and leep years would occur once every 6 years (with some obscure exceptions). This would put the entire world on one universal time, and still let everyone share daylight equaly.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
