Terran Computational Calendar Introduces Minimonths, Year Bases, and Datemods

First time accepted submitter TC+0 (3672227) writes "Inspired by comments regarding its first incarnation, the Terran Computational Calendar's recent redefinition now includes dynamic support for 'leap duration', 'year bases', and 'datemods'. Here's the new abstract from terrancalendar.com (wikia mirror) captured at 44.5.20,6.26.48 TC+7H:

Synchronized with the northern winter solstice, the terran computational calendar began roughly* 10 days before the UNIX Epoch. Each year is composed of 13 identical 28-day months, followed by a 'minimonth' that houses leap days (one most years and two every 4th but not 128th year) and leap seconds (issued by the IERS during that year). Each date is an unambiguous instant in time that exploits zero-based numbering and a handful of delimiters to represent the number of years and constant length months, days, hours, minutes, and seconds that have elapsed since 0TC (the calendar's starting point). An optional 'year base' may be applied to ignore erratic leap duration. Arithmetic date adjusting 'datemods' can be applied to define things like weeks, quarters, and regional times."

Comments

Umm ....

[gstoddart]

OK, sure, you're invented your own calendar. I'm sure it's awesome.

But nobody will use it.

But, hey, some people speak Klingon at parties in the hopes it will impress their friends.

Seriously, do you expect people to use this? Or is it purely an intellectual exercise?

I'm afraid I don't see the point.

Re:Umm ....

[14erCleaner]

It's simple; you just need to change the motions of the heavenly bodies so that Earth orbits the sun exactly 13 times per year, the Earth rotates exactly 28 times per month, and the Moon orbits the Earth exactly once per month. If you can arrange that, I'll gladly switch to your new calendar.

Re:Umm ....

[gstoddart]

1. Some people will use it and like it.

Sure, but let's be honest ... it's like speaking Klingon. It's cool, and maybe a fun intellectual exercise, but in the grand scheme of things more of a hobby than anything.

2. Widespread adoption is not the only redeeming quality a creative endeavor can have.

Sure, I get that ... but I'm desperately trying to see the point. It's like building a framework for building calendars. OK, does this come up much? (Hell, maybe it has applications in converting between calendars for all I know)

3. You're probably one of those people that doesn't get the point of philosophy also.

Now you're just being an ass. I may be a cynical old man, but I'm a well read cynical old man.

4. Then don't use it.

Oddly enough, not a problem.

That doesn't change the fact that the practical applications of this, on the surface at least, seem rather limited.

Feel free to use it. Have your own secret handshake with the 12 other guys who will. You can have annual conventions and everything. :-P

Re:Thirteen months, who's on crack?

[Guppy06]

Actually, back in the pagan days, there WERE 13 months

Embolismic months are not constant, but are inserted because there is a difference of about 11 days between 12 synodic months (~354 days) and one tropical year (~365 days). An embolismic month ends up being added approximately 7 years out of 19, by different algorithms according to different cultures. And even if you were intended to include Jews (and their occasional "Adar II") among your categorization of "pagans," even Christians keep track of embolismic lunations in reckoning the date of that faith's holiest day (in the Gregorian Calendar, May 30 is the first day of the seventh lunation out of thirteen in AD 2014). The only major religion that absolutely, positively insists on a year of 12 months for all purposes is Islam.

The year started in spring, and December was the 10th out of 13 months.

It was the tenth of ten months; the early Romans likely reckoned winter as extracalary. January and February (and Mercedonius/Intercalaris) were added later, probably when what passed for Roman astronomy became relatively more sophisticated. And it wasn't only "pagans" that insisted that March was the first month. The last major hold-out, the United Kingdom of Great Britain, didn't change until AD 1752 (AUC 2505). And not all "pagans" were or are Roman.

Re:One more reason to get off this rock

[VanGarrett]

Seasons and duration of day are logical and meaningful things to base your units of time on. Nuclear decay and EM wavelengths are a rather illogical basis, as these things don't have a practical use or observation in the common life of humans in general. Days and seasons, on the other hand, have an apparent and obvious cycle, which can be observed without need of special equipment. Furthermore, they have an immediate and profound affect on our environment. This is the difference between light and dark, between heat and cold, between growth and recess. These cycles dictate when we can grow food, and how long we have to complete tasks. It therefore makes a great deal of sense that we would want to keep track of these things. The only failing, is that the larger units aren't always comprised of a whole number of the smaller units, as they are based on difference cycles, which are not actually related to eachother.

Now, on the other hand, if we lived on a starship or perhaps a space station unassociated with any particular planet, your timekeeping method could reasonably be arbitrary. You might choose to base it on the crew's mode average circadian rhythm, perhaps. In those circumstances, you would have eliminated the conditions that have inspired our current timekeeping system.