Slashdot Mirror
Ask Slashdot: How Many Time Standards Are There?
jjoelc writes "Being one of those 'suffering' through the time change last night, the optimist in me reminded me that it could be much worse. That's when I started wondering how many different time/date standards there really are. Wikipedia is a good starting point, but is sorely lacking in the various formats used by e.g. Unix, Windows, TRS-80, etc. And that is without even getting into the various calendars that have been in and out of use throughout the ages. So how about it? How many different time/date 'standards' can we come up with? I'm betting there are more than a few horror stories of having to translate between them..."
IMHO, Time Standards would be "standards/standardizations for time keeping", such as say when the railroads crossed the US and decided that local high-noon was not so useful when you translate yourself geographically so swiftly, and thus "time zones" in the US were set up. Some countries (India, and China, maybe others i don't know of...) keep a signle time zone for the entirety of their contiguous expanse for "standardization".
.
Time Formats, again IMHO, would be the "standard" (ha, I heard it [that word] both ways!) used for displaying, communicating, or storing "time data values" on paper, verbally, or in a computerized (or book-keeping) record. One example: "yYYYY-MM-DD-HH-mm-ss.{fractional value of second}" [note I added an extra "y" digit to allow for the Y-10K problem!!!). Floppy disks and TRS-DOS and Apple DOS and MS-DOS and CPM and UNIX and so many others use different formats for this. They also use different "loci" for the "origin point" of time (the "epoch", e.g. time elapsed since point $x$ in time. Gregorian year 1904 for old macs, 1970 for the unix epoch, etc.
on a side note, i love this website:
http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/critdate.htm
it is a huge list of important dates relevant to computer programs, algorithms, and O/Ses.
https://www.accountkiller.com/removal-requested
There are in total 863 different time standard, including historical ones. That's the good thing about standards, there are so many to choose from.
Now, please someone post a link to that xkcd comic and we can move on to the next question.
My first program:
Hell Segmentation fault
Excel is known for considering year 1900 as a leap year even though it's not, but I don't know if this historical bug (carried over from Lotus 1-2-3 according to wikipedia) is still respected. So consider Excel usable to year 1901 to a date I don't know.
Likewise the Y2K38 problem with Unix is that time, if represented with 32 bits, doesn't go before a certain 20th century date as well as ending abruptingly on a certain date and time in 2038 - causing the end of the world. Both examples mean that you have to pay attention to the usable time range - be it usable length, absolute minimum date, absolute maximum date, with hopefully some time standards offering infinite range (like A.D. / C.E. year numbering?)
Leap seconds is another infuriating problem and relativity in general and I have to wonder if we have to consider Mars's time, Earth's time, Sun's time, Voyager 2's time etc. in any relevant way. Have fun!
Another interesting one is GPS-Time, which is basically UTC without the leap seconds.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GPS_time#Timekeeping
http://xkcd.com/1179/
This subject has already been discussed.
Worse than suffering through the actual daylight/standard time changeovers, are dealing with timezones themselves in code. Most timezones are full hour offsets from UTC, but there are a few that are N:30 or N:45. There are even offsets which are greater than 12.
Then you have to deal with differing dates of when the changeovers actually happen over the years in a given timezone.
If you ever write an iCal-related application and have to deal with recurring events, you'll soon realize that Outlook's iCal support is comparatively even worse than IE's web standards support.
Also, relevant xkcd.
We have quite a lot of them, but we don't have many systems that are fully RFC2550 Compliant:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2550
Things you think are in the Constitution, but are not.
This is what happens when you don't.
http://infiniteundo.com/post/25509354022/more-falsehoods-programmers-believe-about-time-wisdom
Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
Swatch Internet Time is truly the savior to all of this trouble. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swatch_Internet_Time
The whole time zone thing is just ridiculous in this age of information. When I'm too busy cruising the information super highway, I don't want to worry about whether the person I'm on IRC with is in London or Sydney. And for that matter, seconds? minutes? Relics of the past. Just divide the day into 1,000 beats and you're good to go.
So what if no one has any sense of what 10 beats is (14 minutes 4 seconds), and so what if it was created by a watch maker probably to sell more watches. Swatch Internet Time is the wave of the future, man! Throw your grandfather clocks away and dial-up to greatness on your 56k. You don't want to be left behind in the Swatch revolution!
Wrong. Only if you're in a part of the world that observes Daylight Saving. Which puts you in the minority.
Dude, how on earth can you get it all so badly wrong? Is this a subtle postmodernist troll or something? Sorry if it isn't, starting a discussion on a scientific subject with "IMHO" sets off my bullshit alarm.
Historically, a day was defined as 1 earth rotation. An hour was 1/24th of a day, a minute as 1/60th of an hour, and a second as 1/60th of a minute. Hardly very arbitrary, is it? Problem is, turns out that there are constant fluctuations and drift on the length of a celestial day (and year). This is very impractical because there are no known clock mechanisms (bar the solar system itself) that can catch these fluctuations, so humanity needed a more solid definition of time for entirely irrelevant tasks such as performing precise scientific measurements and keeping GPS sattellites in sync. Common off-the-shelf clock mechanisms couldn't be used for this purpose because they also fluctuate too much. Instead, we redefined the lenght of a second based on an immutable physical property: the duration of 9,192,631,770 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the caesium 133 atom. Cesium was "arbitrarily" chosen because of atomic clock engineering and accuracy considerations, the hyperfine transition was "arbitrarily" chosen because it is not too easy to skew, directly relates to a physical constant and can be measured in a reasonably convenient way, and the number 9,192,631,770 was "arbitrarily" chosen to make the SI second as close as possible to the then-best estimate of the average duration of the celestial second (1/86400 of a day). Then we redefined the SI minute, hour, day,... based on that physically immutable(*) second. Problem is, that didn't stop the earth rotation and solar system from fluctuating. And that's why we have leap seconds now and then; to keep our non-arbitrary SI-based time in sync with the arbitrary vagaries(+) of the solar system.
(*) Well, pretty immutable for the practical applications you're going to care about. There's always room for improvement.
(+) To be precise, orbital mechanics are well-understood so in that sense they're not random.(#) Problem is, it's a chaotic system, so no matter how precise we measure all the boundary conditions, a simulation of the solar system will over time deviate more and more from reality. That's why leap seconds are based om measurements.
(#) If you look even deeper into the subject, there are solar winds and weather-dependent tidal effects contaminating the whole shebang with fluctuations we can't even predict a few weeks in advance because they're complex. So yeah, arbitrary.
The standardization of the second took place 46 years ago. It is now the basis of SI, the international system of standards. The following is from NIST, the Federal Government agency in charge of standards:
"The unit of time, the second, was defined originally as the fraction 1/86 400 of the mean solar day. The exact definition of "mean solar day" was left to astronomical theories. However, measurement showed that irregularities in the rotation of the Earth could not be taken into account by the theory and have the effect that this definition does not allow the required accuracy to be achieved. ... Experimental work had, however, already shown that an atomic standard of time-interval, based on a transition between two energy levels of an atom or a molecule, could be realized and reproduced much more precisely. Considering that a very precise definition of the unit of time is indispensable for the International System, the 13th CGPM (1967) decided to replace the definition of the second by the following ...:
"The second is the duration of 9 192 631 770 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the cesium 133 atom."
Not only that but, length is now defined in terms of the second:
"In turn, to further reduce the uncertainty, in 1983 the CGPM replaced this latter definition by the following definition:
"The meter is the length of the path travelled by light in vacuum during a time interval of 1/299 792 458 of a second.
"Note that the effect of this definition is to fix the speed of light in vacuum at exactly 299 792 458 mÂs-1. The original international prototype of the meter, which was sanctioned by the 1st CGPM in 1889, is still kept at the BIPM under the conditions specified in 1889."
In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
24 and 60 were not arbitrary. They were chosen by ancient Babylonians because they are cleanly divisible by many numbers; 24 by 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, and 12, and 60 by 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 10, 12, 15, 20, and 30. It was important to be able to divide time cleanly because they didn't have fractions or decimals at the time. Citation needed, of course, but I don't have time to find a source and this is something I remember from when I was a kid.
I sometimes ask revealing, often ignorant-seeming questions. Maybe they're harder to answer than you think.