Re: Permanent DST

2016-11-26 Thread Richard Langley 
"Daylight saving time can decrease the frequency of wildlife–vehicle 
collisions" by
William A. Ellis, Sean I. FitzGibbon, Benjamin J. Barth, Amanda C. Niehaus, 
Gwendolyn K. David, Brendan D. Taylor, Helena Matsushige, Alistair Melzer, Fred 
B. Bercovitch, Frank Carrick, Darryl N. Jones, Cathryn Dexter, Amber Gillett, 
Martin Predavec, Dan Lunney, Robbie S. Wilson
Biology Letters, November 2016, Volume 12, issue 11, DOI: 10.1098/rsbl.2016.0632

Abstract

Daylight saving time (DST) could reduce collisions with wildlife by changing 
the timing of commuter traffic relative to the behaviour of nocturnal animals. 
To test this idea, we tracked wild koalas (Phascolarctos cinereus) in southeast 
Queensland, where koalas have declined by 80% in the last 20 years, and 
compared their movements with traffic patterns along roads where they are often 
killed. Using a simple model, we found that DST could decrease collisions with 
koalas by 8% on weekdays and 11% at weekends, simply by shifting the timing of 
traffic relative to darkness. Wildlife conservation and road safety should 
become part of the debate on DST.

-- Richard Langley

P.S. Sorry to prolong the debate, which is only periferally related to 
sundials, but this article (I am not a biologist) just came to my attention.

-
| Richard B. LangleyE-mail: l...@unb.ca |
| Geodetic Research Laboratory  Web: http://gge.unb.ca/ |
| Dept. of Geodesy and Geomatics EngineeringPhone:+1 506 453-5142   |
| University of New Brunswick   Fax:  +1 506 453-4943   |
| Fredericton, N.B., Canada  E3B 5A3|
|Fredericton?  Where's that?  See: http://www.fredericton.ca/   |
-



> On Nov 25, 2016, at 2:31 PM, Douglas Bateman  
> wrote:
> 
> Dear Barbara and Augustine,
> 
> I am flattered that you are following this dialogue, and I’m sure Frank is 
> too.
> 
> Frank wishes to wind up the discussion, and this can be my final, and 
> personal, contribution.
> 
> First of all, it is obvious that Frank is both happy to be a very early riser 
> and is prepared to challenge any topic and any assumptions. For example the 
> ‘effective day centred on 3pm’.
> 
> If I rise very early in the summer, I may be enthralled by a sunrise or quiet 
> dawn (and wonder if this is the best part of the day). However, I like to 
> have 8 hours of sleep, AND enjoy long summer evenings, glass in hand. It 
> follows that for most days, I am prepared to sacrifice the early hours, and 
> therefore my day may run from 7am to 10 or 11pm.  3pm is therefore a nominal 
> middle of the waking day. Society in the UK as a whole seems happy with this, 
> and is the basic reason for daylight saving time.
> 
> When winter approaches, the clocks are put back with many grumbles about the 
> darker evenings. Without delving into accident statistics, it is obvious that 
> the risks to school children walking or cycling home in the dark are 
> increased. It is equally obvious that motorists driving home in the dark 
> after a tiring day, and impatient to be home, increase the risks as well, 
> both to themselves and others.
> 
> I’m sure that these opinions, and similar, may have have caused some 
> countries to adopt DST on a permanent basis.
> 
> Ultimately we can define time to be whatever we want it to be, and even 
> ignore the historical convention of noon when the sun is due south, even if 
> this offends some of the sundial enthusiasts.
> 
> Glad to know you have enjoyed the fun, even if there is a serious element.
> 
> Best wishes, Doug
> 
> 
>> On 25 Nov 2016, at 14:41, Barbara and Augustine McCaffrey 
>>  wrote:
>> 
>> Please, I am enjoying and learning from the discussion, so I would prefer 
>> that it continue where I may read it.  Many thanks.  
>> 
>> On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 3:22 PM, Frank King  wrote:
>> Dear Doug,
>> 
>> It is probably time to conclude this
>> fascinating discussion so this will
>> be my final public offering (for a
>> while).
>> 
>> > A significant part of my note is
>> > reporting the work of others...
>> 
>> Indeed so.  I am familiar with most
>> of your citations, especially, the
>> report by the Cambridge Engineers.
>> The methodology used was an utter
>> disgrace in my view.
>> 
>> It is exceptionally difficult to
>> find a way of comparing like with
>> like without getting biased results.
>> Also, making predictions, especially
>> economic predictions, is notoriously
>> subject to error.
>> 
>> My proposal to compare two adjacent
>> U.S. towns in different time zones
>> is a better approach but I am the
>> first to admit that the two sets
>> of results would not be truly
>> independent (in the statistical
>> sense) and the

Re: Permanent DST

2016-11-25 Thread Frank King 
Dear John,

You are right to point out the error
of Doug's ways.  I have been known to
do this myself :-)

That said, this isn't quite right
either...

> It is only the benighted people who
> are forced to live in the northern
> hemisphere who persist with the
> belief of a southerly sun.

I have several times seen the sun due
north in the northern hemisphere: in
the Arctic and in Singapore, to take
two examples.

Likewise, you can see the sun due
SOUTH in the Antarctic and, without
leaving Australia, you can see the
sun due south in Darwin or Cairns
or, indeed, anywhere just a little
bit north of Alice Springs.

Next month is a good time of year
to see whether I am right!

Very best wishes

Frank

---
https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial

Re: Permanent DST

2016-11-25 Thread John Pickard 

Hi Douglas,

In the spirit of accuracy, I have to point out (very gently so as to not cause 
offence) that noon actually occurs when the sun is due NORTH. It is only the 
benighted people who are forced to live in the northern hemisphere who persist 
with the belief of a southerly sun.


Cheers, John

John Pickard
john.pick...@bigpond.com 

Sydney, Australia
33o 39.5’S 151o 06.4’E



From: Douglas Bateman 
Sent: Saturday, November 26, 2016 5:31 AM
To: Barbara and Augustine McCaffrey 
Cc: Sundial list 
Subject: Re: Permanent DST

Dear Barbara and Augustine, 

I am flattered that you are following this dialogue, and I’m sure Frank is too.

Frank wishes to wind up the discussion, and this can be my final, and personal, 
contribution.

First of all, it is obvious that Frank is both happy to be a very early riser 
and is prepared to challenge any topic and any assumptions. For example the 
‘effective day centred on 3pm’.

If I rise very early in the summer, I may be enthralled by a sunrise or quiet 
dawn (and wonder if this is the best part of the day). However, I like to have 
8 hours of sleep, AND enjoy long summer evenings, glass in hand. It follows 
that for most days, I am prepared to sacrifice the early hours, and therefore 
my day may run from 7am to 10 or 11pm.  3pm is therefore a nominal middle of 
the waking day. Society in the UK as a whole seems happy with this, and is the 
basic reason for daylight saving time.

When winter approaches, the clocks are put back with many grumbles about the 
darker evenings. Without delving into accident statistics, it is obvious that 
the risks to school children walking or cycling home in the dark are increased. 
It is equally obvious that motorists driving home in the dark after a tiring 
day, and impatient to be home, increase the risks as well, both to themselves 
and others.

I’m sure that these opinions, and similar, may have have caused some countries 
to adopt DST on a permanent basis.

Ultimately we can define time to be whatever we want it to be, and even ignore 
the historical convention of noon when the sun is due south, even if this 
offends some of the sundial enthusiasts.

Glad to know you have enjoyed the fun, even if there is a serious element.

Best wishes, Doug

---
https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial

Re: Permanent DST

2016-11-25 Thread Douglas Bateman 
Dear Barbara and Augustine,

I am flattered that you are following this dialogue, and I’m sure Frank is too.

Frank wishes to wind up the discussion, and this can be my final, and personal, 
contribution.

First of all, it is obvious that Frank is both happy to be a very early riser 
and is prepared to challenge any topic and any assumptions. For example the 
‘effective day centred on 3pm’.

If I rise very early in the summer, I may be enthralled by a sunrise or quiet 
dawn (and wonder if this is the best part of the day). However, I like to have 
8 hours of sleep, AND enjoy long summer evenings, glass in hand. It follows 
that for most days, I am prepared to sacrifice the early hours, and therefore 
my day may run from 7am to 10 or 11pm.  3pm is therefore a nominal middle of 
the waking day. Society in the UK as a whole seems happy with this, and is the 
basic reason for daylight saving time.

When winter approaches, the clocks are put back with many grumbles about the 
darker evenings. Without delving into accident statistics, it is obvious that 
the risks to school children walking or cycling home in the dark are increased. 
It is equally obvious that motorists driving home in the dark after a tiring 
day, and impatient to be home, increase the risks as well, both to themselves 
and others.

I’m sure that these opinions, and similar, may have have caused some countries 
to adopt DST on a permanent basis.

Ultimately we can define time to be whatever we want it to be, and even ignore 
the historical convention of noon when the sun is due south, even if this 
offends some of the sundial enthusiasts.

Glad to know you have enjoyed the fun, even if there is a serious element.

Best wishes, Doug


> On 25 Nov 2016, at 14:41, Barbara and Augustine McCaffrey 
>  wrote:
> 
> Please, I am enjoying and learning from the discussion, so I would prefer 
> that it continue where I may read it.  Many thanks.  
> 
> On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 3:22 PM, Frank King  > wrote:
> Dear Doug,
> 
> It is probably time to conclude this
> fascinating discussion so this will
> be my final public offering (for a
> while).
> 
> > A significant part of my note is
> > reporting the work of others...
> 
> Indeed so.  I am familiar with most
> of your citations, especially, the
> report by the Cambridge Engineers.
> The methodology used was an utter
> disgrace in my view.
> 
> It is exceptionally difficult to
> find a way of comparing like with
> like without getting biased results.
> Also, making predictions, especially
> economic predictions, is notoriously
> subject to error.
> 
> My proposal to compare two adjacent
> U.S. towns in different time zones
> is a better approach but I am the
> first to admit that the two sets
> of results would not be truly
> independent (in the statistical
> sense) and the results would be
> biased.  For example, there will
> be people who live in one time
> zone and work in the other.
> 
> In terms of energy use, I don't
> believe a word of the analysis.
> The energy used when driving
> five miles to work is the same
> whether you drive in the dark
> or in the light.
> 
> I suggest you study the experience
> of Portugal:
> 
>   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_in_Portugal 
> 
> 
> They have switched time zones
> several times and are forever
> being persuaded to use CEST.
> 
> Sometimes they try it and then
> find how unsatisfactory it is...
> 
>   when school classes started,
>   the sun was still rising,
>   which eventually had
>   repercussions on students'
>   school performance and their
>   safety during morning trips
>   from home to school.
> 
>   A company hired by European
>   Commission conducted a study
>   which concluded that, in fact,
>   there were no energy savings
>   because in the early morning,
>   due to the dark, workers turned
>   on lights in their offices,
>   and they forgot to turn them
>   off, leaving them switched on
>   for the rest of the morning,
>   which increased energy
>   consumption.
> 
>   ...insurance companies reported
>   a rise in the number of accidents.
> 
> Look, I don't believe all of this
> either!  Lighting uses a minuscule
> amount of energy compared with
> heating and transport though, of
> course, it shouldn't be wasted.
> 
> Portugal is now back on GMT and
> GMT+1 just like the U.K.
> 
> Remember, the U.K. DID experiment
> with year-round summer time and
> then gave it up.
> 
> You may say that this was because
> of grumbles from Scottish herdsman.
> 
> I have always wondered just how
> Scottish herdsmen can be such a
> forceful political lobby!  That
> doesn't stop them being right!
> 
> > ...the middle of the effective
> > day has moved to something
> > like 3pm.
> 
> Given your wish to fiddle with
> our clocks, this is ill-defined.
> I assume you mean three hours
> after solar transit?
> 
> This is a case of generalising
> from

Re: Permanent DST

2016-11-25 Thread Frank King 
Dear Doug,

It is probably time to conclude this
fascinating discussion so this will
be my final public offering (for a
while).

> A significant part of my note is
> reporting the work of others...

Indeed so.  I am familiar with most
of your citations, especially, the
report by the Cambridge Engineers.
The methodology used was an utter
disgrace in my view.

It is exceptionally difficult to
find a way of comparing like with
like without getting biased results.
Also, making predictions, especially
economic predictions, is notoriously
subject to error.

My proposal to compare two adjacent
U.S. towns in different time zones
is a better approach but I am the
first to admit that the two sets
of results would not be truly
independent (in the statistical
sense) and the results would be
biased.  For example, there will
be people who live in one time
zone and work in the other.

In terms of energy use, I don't
believe a word of the analysis.
The energy used when driving
five miles to work is the same
whether you drive in the dark
or in the light.

I suggest you study the experience
of Portugal:

  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_in_Portugal

They have switched time zones
several times and are forever
being persuaded to use CEST.

Sometimes they try it and then
find how unsatisfactory it is...

  when school classes started,
  the sun was still rising,
  which eventually had
  repercussions on students'
  school performance and their
  safety during morning trips
  from home to school.

  A company hired by European
  Commission conducted a study
  which concluded that, in fact,
  there were no energy savings
  because in the early morning,
  due to the dark, workers turned
  on lights in their offices,
  and they forgot to turn them
  off, leaving them switched on
  for the rest of the morning,
  which increased energy
  consumption.

  ...insurance companies reported
  a rise in the number of accidents.

Look, I don't believe all of this
either!  Lighting uses a minuscule
amount of energy compared with
heating and transport though, of
course, it shouldn't be wasted.

Portugal is now back on GMT and
GMT+1 just like the U.K.

Remember, the U.K. DID experiment
with year-round summer time and
then gave it up.

You may say that this was because
of grumbles from Scottish herdsman.

I have always wondered just how
Scottish herdsmen can be such a
forceful political lobby!  That
doesn't stop them being right!

> ...the middle of the effective
> day has moved to something
> like 3pm.

Given your wish to fiddle with
our clocks, this is ill-defined.
I assume you mean three hours
after solar transit?

This is a case of generalising
from yourself and those you
associate with.  Certainly
count me out!

In the 1980s I worked for a spell
in Magdeburg University, then in
the DDR.  My hosting professor
asked me if my lectures could be
the first of the day.

"Yes," I said eagerly.  "Fine,"
he replied, "our first lecture
is at 7am so I'll meet you in
my office at 06:30 tomorrow."

This suited me very well but I
had to check with my landlady
about breakfast.

I explained that I would be
leaving about 6am and I asked
whether she could set out my
breakfast the night before.

"No need," she said, "I leave
for work myself at 4am, so I
shall set out your breakfast
before I depart."

As it turned out, I was the
last person in the household
to leave for work when I left
at 6am.

I had had some misgivings
about the East German regime
but this aspect seemed truly
excellent to me!

I now see that it wouldn't
work in Portugal!

By all means reply but I
suggest "off-list".

Very best wishes

Frank

---
https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial

Re: Permanent DST

2016-11-23 Thread Douglas Bateman 
Dear Frank,

You have done me the honour of at least reading my attachment, and in your 
reply I will gloss over the comment where you seem to imply that I am 
deliberately telling lies. 

A significant part of my note is reporting the work of others such as our 
former Government agency, the Transport Research Laboratory, and the report 
(with many references) by the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents.

You are quite right that it may be better to steer clear of road accidents and 
predictions, which are difficult to analyse or prove. Perhaps concentrate on 
the other important topic, linked to global warming, the reduction of demand 
for electricity. Here your colleagues in the University of Cambridge have made 
a detailed analysis and some predictions too. If you disagree with any of the 
analyses or methods (and for the above reports) you could perhaps take issue 
with them.

Returning to DST and Single Double Summer Time, the key factor is the shift 
away from purely ‘rural’ time (before artificial light) of a day centred on 
noon, to the current life styles where the middle of the effective day has 
moved to something like 3pm.

I had hoped that my note was objective enough, and with sufficient detail, for 
readers to draw their own conclusions or even go back to the source documents.

Regards, Doug




> On 23 Nov 2016, at 16:09, Frank King  wrote:
> 
> Dear Doug,
> 
> I read your message and your attachment.
> 
> There are so many flaws in your analysis
> that it is difficult to know where to
> begin.
> 
> Since you find road accident statistics
> so compelling I shall confine myself to
> demolishing all you have to say there...
> 
> There is a wonderful book by Darrell Huff
> "How to lie with statistics".  You seem
> to have studied this carefully.
> 
> Still, since you want us all to tell
> lies about the time, I suppose it is in
> order to tell lies about statistics.
> 
> First, two matters where you are right:
> 
> 1. The UK had year-round BST from
>1968 to 1971.
> 
> 2. During this period there was a
>reduction in road accidents.
> 
> That is called an ASSOCIATION.  You
> cannot infer CAUSATION.  There could
> be any number of reasons for this
> reduction:
> 
> a) The introduction of drink-drive
>legislation in 1967.
> 
> b) The increase in seat-belt usage,
>not yet compulsory but more and
>more cars were being fitted with
>seat belts.
> 
> c) Perhaps the winters were unusually
>mild.
> 
> Those are the kinds of questions you
> should immediately ask before making
> ANY inference.
> 
> Next, you absolutely MUST investigate
> what happened AFTER we abandoned using
> year-round BST.  Did road accidents
> increase again?
> 
>   WHY HAVEN'T YOU TOLD US?
> 
> Answer: either because you didn't look
> or because you didn't like what you
> found when you did look.
> 
> OK, well look at the attached file:
> 
>   RoadDeathsGB.jpg
> 
> You will see that following a post-war
> low around 1950, road deaths increased
> relentlessly until a peak in 1965.
> 
> They then started a steady decline
> which continued throughout the period
> 1968 to 1971 and you won't notice so
> much as a kink in the line from 1965
> to 1971.  The slope in the three years
> up to 1968 exactly matches the slope
> from 1968 to 1971.  BUT:
> 
>  AS SOON AS WE STOPPED TELLING LIES
>  ABOUT THE TIME IN WINTER, THE RATE
>  OF FALL SIGNIFICANTLY ACCELERATED.
> 
> Using YOUR logic, we can see that during
> the winters that we were telling lies,
> we actually HELD BACK the reduction in
> road deaths.
> 
>  YOUR proposal was killing people!
> 
> Funny how the time liars don't tell
> us that!
> 
> Now this is still flawed inference
> and I wouldn't make this assertion
> myself.
> 
> The truth is that it is very hard to
> design an experiment to verify one
> way or another.  You cannot re-run
> the same years with different time
> rules.
> 
> There is, though, a much better way
> to investigate.  What you need to
> do is to identify two U.S. towns in
> the same state that are not far
> apart but which are in different
> time zones.  They should be about
> the same size and have the same
> mix of population and industry.
> 
> The more easterly of the two towns
> will have have its clocks one hour
> ahead of the more westerly.  By
> your hypothesis, there should be
> significantly fewer road accidents
> in the more easterly of the two.
> 
> OK, go find some research data.
> 
> We can't do this in the U.K. but
> you can look at Dover and Calais.
> 
> These towns are fairly close
> and the clocks in Calais are
> one hour ahead of the clocks
> in Dover.
> 
> By your hypothesis, there should be
> significantly fewer road accidents
> in Calais.
> 
> OK, go find some research data.
> 
> Very best wishes
> 
> Frank
> 

---
https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial

Re: Permanent DST

2016-11-23 Thread Frank King 
Dear Doug,

I read your message and your attachment.

There are so many flaws in your analysis
that it is difficult to know where to
begin.

Since you find road accident statistics
so compelling I shall confine myself to
demolishing all you have to say there...

There is a wonderful book by Darrell Huff
"How to lie with statistics".  You seem
to have studied this carefully.

Still, since you want us all to tell
lies about the time, I suppose it is in
order to tell lies about statistics.

First, two matters where you are right:

 1. The UK had year-round BST from
1968 to 1971.

 2. During this period there was a
reduction in road accidents.

That is called an ASSOCIATION.  You
cannot infer CAUSATION.  There could
be any number of reasons for this
reduction:

 a) The introduction of drink-drive
legislation in 1967.

 b) The increase in seat-belt usage,
not yet compulsory but more and
more cars were being fitted with
seat belts.

 c) Perhaps the winters were unusually
mild.

Those are the kinds of questions you
should immediately ask before making
ANY inference.

Next, you absolutely MUST investigate
what happened AFTER we abandoned using
year-round BST.  Did road accidents
increase again?

   WHY HAVEN'T YOU TOLD US?

Answer: either because you didn't look
or because you didn't like what you
found when you did look.

OK, well look at the attached file:

   RoadDeathsGB.jpg

You will see that following a post-war
low around 1950, road deaths increased
relentlessly until a peak in 1965.

They then started a steady decline
which continued throughout the period
1968 to 1971 and you won't notice so
much as a kink in the line from 1965
to 1971.  The slope in the three years
up to 1968 exactly matches the slope
from 1968 to 1971.  BUT:

  AS SOON AS WE STOPPED TELLING LIES
  ABOUT THE TIME IN WINTER, THE RATE
  OF FALL SIGNIFICANTLY ACCELERATED.

Using YOUR logic, we can see that during
the winters that we were telling lies,
we actually HELD BACK the reduction in
road deaths.

  YOUR proposal was killing people!

Funny how the time liars don't tell
us that!

Now this is still flawed inference
and I wouldn't make this assertion
myself.

The truth is that it is very hard to
design an experiment to verify one
way or another.  You cannot re-run
the same years with different time
rules.

There is, though, a much better way
to investigate.  What you need to
do is to identify two U.S. towns in
the same state that are not far
apart but which are in different
time zones.  They should be about
the same size and have the same
mix of population and industry.

The more easterly of the two towns
will have have its clocks one hour
ahead of the more westerly.  By
your hypothesis, there should be
significantly fewer road accidents
in the more easterly of the two.

OK, go find some research data.

We can't do this in the U.K. but
you can look at Dover and Calais.

These towns are fairly close
and the clocks in Calais are
one hour ahead of the clocks
in Dover.

By your hypothesis, there should be
significantly fewer road accidents
in Calais.

OK, go find some research data.

Very best wishes

Frank
---
https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial

Re: Permanent DST

2016-11-22 Thread Douglas Bateman 
Dear Tony,

Your ‘natural geometry of daylight’ is an interesting concept, and more useful 
than the frequent rants by those who I am going to call the ‘blanket 
botherers’. (As inspired the oft quoted:  Only a white man could possibly 
believe that by cutting a foot off one end of a blanket and stitching it on to 
the other end you get a longer blanket.)

The botherers always fail to answer the childishly simple question as to why we 
adopted DST in the first place, and then adopted double summer time in both 
world wars.

To answers some of Frank’s other points, you are quite right to point out that 
many of us on the list are of a very “lucky" few who have an interest in the 
precise location of the sun. I suggest that the vast majority of our population 
have only very vague ideas as to where the sun is in hourly terms, and many 
could hardly point due north or south to better than 45º. Similarly the concept 
of noon when the sun is at its zenith is an abstraction, and nothing at all to 
do with daily life.

You are also right that we have externally imposed constraints – if fact we 
live in highly synchronised society, and much better for all make the change 
together and by decree.

Permanent DST is a good idea, and then to go one better and add the extra hour 
as before, to what the pundits call Single Double Summer Time (SDST). This 
gives many benefits to society as whole, not least in potentially saving the 
odd power station or wind farm, and reduction in fatal road accidents. There is 
also a strong societal trend to an ‘evening economy’ which would benefit by 
longer lighter evenings. For the general population (and a fundamental point 
about DST) the day is not symmetrical!

I was annoyed about this a number of years ago, and then followed it up, by 
coincidence, with an essay in reply to a letter in the journal of the British 
Horological Institute. The attached note, with some updates, contains essential 
references. However I should stress that these arguments apply mainly to the 
UK. When read and digested it is hard to argue the case for not accepting a 
change to SDST, but the politicians lacked the courage. The accident statistics 
are particularly revealing with the implication that by not adopting SDST we 
are consigning 600 people a year to premature deaths.

I am assuming that the pdf comes through the filter, and if not, I will copy 
the text into another email.

I know that I will have difficulty in keeping the blanket botherers quiet, but 
I can try!

Best wishes, Doug



Daylight saving essay, BHI, update.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document



> On 22 Nov 2016, at 10:53, Tony Finch  wrote:
> 
> Frank King  wrote:
>> 
>> You can get out of bed whenever you wish on any day of the year
>> so it is...
> 
> Well, lucky people can, but many people have externally imposed
> constraints on their timetables - school times, shop opening times,
> working shift times, delivery restriction times - and these are based
> more on what the clock says than what the sun says.
> 
> Personally, I favour an approach that's based more on the natural geometry
> of daylight and less on politics. 
> http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/25.10.html#subj1
> 
> Tony.
> -- 
> f.anthony.n.finch    http://dotat.at/  -  I xn--zr8h punycode
> Southeast Iceland: Northerly 4 or 5, becoming variable 3 or 4. Rough becoming
> moderate. Wintry showers. Good, occasionally moderate.
> ---
> https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial
> 

---
https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial

Re: Permanent DST

2016-11-22 Thread Tony Finch 
Frank King  wrote:
>
> You can get out of bed whenever you wish on any day of the year
> so it is...

Well, lucky people can, but many people have externally imposed
constraints on their timetables - school times, shop opening times,
working shift times, delivery restriction times - and these are based
more on what the clock says than what the sun says.

Personally, I favour an approach that's based more on the natural geometry
of daylight and less on politics. 
http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/25.10.html#subj1

Tony.
-- 
f.anthony.n.finch    http://dotat.at/  -  I xn--zr8h punycode
Southeast Iceland: Northerly 4 or 5, becoming variable 3 or 4. Rough becoming
moderate. Wintry showers. Good, occasionally moderate.
---
https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial

Re: Permanent DST

2016-11-21 Thread Frank King 
Dear John,

You reply...

> I have to take issue with your notion
> that God ... handed us a 24 hour clock.

I suggest you read my message a little
more carefully.

 a) I didn't mention God at all.

 b) I was exceptionally careful to
spell out that the 24-hour clock
was irrelevant.

I was SO careful about (b) that I said
it TWICE...

  "I don't care what time
   measurement system you use..."

  "Still without caring what time
   system you use..."

Now read my message again and take
issue with something that I DID say.

Very best wishes

Frank

---
https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial

Re: Permanent DST

2016-11-20 Thread John Pickard 

Hi Frank,

I have to take issue with your notion that God (in her infinite wisdom) 
handed us a 24 hour clock. Why 24? Why not 29 just to have a prime number? 
Or the decimal 100 hours per day? Or perhaps a more logical 360 units per 
day? God may well have given us a daily rotation, but she didn't inflict the 
24 hour subdivision on us, we did it to ourselves. A bit like the 
abomination that is the Imperial system of measurement.


Cameras etc: I agree with you re the advantages of always using UTC, but I 
have other constraints that require me to use local time (whatever that is), 
and it's easier to change the time in the camera than do some 
post-processing.


Getting out of bed: I'm sure that males past a certain age will agree with 
me that it's not the clock that gets us out of bed in the morning, 
regardless of DST being on or off!



Cheers, John

John Pickard
john.pick...@bigpond.com

-Original Message- 
From: Frank King

Sent: Monday, November 21, 2016 4:02 AM
To: sundial@uni-koeln.de
Subject: Re: Permanent DST

Dear All,

John Pickard notes...


As a consequence in summer you can
meet more than five different times
in Australia which means that on a
long trip you can spend a lot of
time changing the clocks in cameras,
etc.


So why bother?  The clock in my camera
stays at UTC whether I am in Seattle,
London or Hong Kong, whether DST is in
force or not.


Most of us in the southern states like
DST ... and look forward to it at the
end of winter.  Equally, we don't like
when it ends.


That is probably true of most people in
the U.K. but, in my view, they think that
changing from DST "causes" dark evenings.


Of course the funniest thing about DST
are the arguments of opponents who seem
to think that the 24 hour clock is some
immutable thing handed down from the gods...


Hang on a moment.  Subject to a modicum of
interpretation that is almost exactly my
view...

 24-hours is simply the mean time it
 takes the Earth to rotate relative
 to the sun.  I don't care what time
 measurement system you use but this
 period IS handed down by the gods
 (or nature as I prefer to say).

Still without caring what time system
you use, we have a secondary problem
of deciding on a reference point in
the rotation to mark the end of one
rotation and the start of the next.

Two obvious reference points are sunrise
and sunset.  Even very low forms of life
understand these times.

Two less obvious reference points are
noon and midnight, the instants of
superior and inferior transit of the
sun.

All four reference points are given by
nature (gods).  That seems enough choice
to me.


the only thing that changes is the
"time" you get out of bed.


NO.  NO.  NO.

The thing that changes is the definition
that god-damn legislators decide to give
to midnight.

You can get out of bed whenever you wish
on any day of the year so it is...

 UNNECESSARY TO TELL LIES ABOUT THE TIME?

The arguments in favour of DST are all bogus
in my view.  A simple reductio ad absurdum
proof will demonstrate this...

 Let us ACCEPT all the arguments in favour
 of DST.  I have heard that there are fewer
 road accidents, that children are happier,
 the grass is greener and cows give more
 milk.

Well, we can now look at a given time zone
and, by this hypothesis, within that time
zone, there should be fewer accidents in
the west than in the east, and so on.

This doesn't seem to happen.  End of theory.

Did you know that China uses ONE time zone
for its 60-degree expanse of latitude?  Are
there fewer accidents in the west of China
than in the east?  No.

In China they get out of bed at different
clock times in different parts of the country
but the clocks all say the same time (or should
do).

Good for China.  I would go one better and have
UTC worldwide.

For an extreme BAD example take Iran.  Iran has
Daylight Saving [well on and off; it has it at
the moment] but much of it is in the Tropics
where the length of daylight doesn't change
that much during the year.  So what are you
trying to save.  MUCH worse than that...

Iran is a seriously Muslim country and most
people say their prayers five times a day.

When the clocks change the whole pattern of
the working day has to change because, by
the clocks, the prayer times are shifted by
an hour.  Unlike when you get out of bed,
you CAN'T change the prayer times.  They
are handed down by the gods!

Remember what the Native American said when
he heard about Daylight Saving:

 Only a white man could possibly believe
 that by cutting a foot off one end of a
 blanket and stitching it on to the other
 end you get a longer blanket.

Frank King
Cambridge, U.K.


---
https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial 


---
https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial

Re: Permanent DST

2016-11-20 Thread John Pickard 
Hi Kevin, You have made my day with the Churchill quote. Brilliant.

Cheers, John

John Pickard
john.pick...@bigpond.com 



From: Kevin Karney 
Sent: Sunday, November 20, 2016 9:20 PM
To: John Pickard 
Cc: sundial@uni-koeln.de 
Subject: Re: Permanent DST

Nothing much changes! 
  UK Daylight Saving Bill - 1909
  William Churchill, President of the Board of Trade
  … this Bill does not propose a change from Natural Time to Artificial Time, 
but only to substitute a convenient standard of Artificial Time for an 
inconvenient standard of Artificial Time …
Kevin



 ---
https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial

Re: Permanent DST

2016-11-20 Thread Frank King 
Dear All,

John Pickard notes...

> As a consequence in summer you can
> meet more than five different times
> in Australia which means that on a
> long trip you can spend a lot of
> time changing the clocks in cameras,
> etc.

So why bother?  The clock in my camera
stays at UTC whether I am in Seattle,
London or Hong Kong, whether DST is in
force or not.

> Most of us in the southern states like
> DST ... and look forward to it at the
> end of winter.  Equally, we don't like
> when it ends.

That is probably true of most people in
the U.K. but, in my view, they think that
changing from DST "causes" dark evenings.

> Of course the funniest thing about DST
> are the arguments of opponents who seem
> to think that the 24 hour clock is some
> immutable thing handed down from the gods...

Hang on a moment.  Subject to a modicum of
interpretation that is almost exactly my
view...

  24-hours is simply the mean time it
  takes the Earth to rotate relative
  to the sun.  I don't care what time
  measurement system you use but this
  period IS handed down by the gods
  (or nature as I prefer to say).

Still without caring what time system
you use, we have a secondary problem
of deciding on a reference point in
the rotation to mark the end of one
rotation and the start of the next.

Two obvious reference points are sunrise
and sunset.  Even very low forms of life
understand these times.

Two less obvious reference points are
noon and midnight, the instants of
superior and inferior transit of the
sun.

All four reference points are given by
nature (gods).  That seems enough choice
to me.

> the only thing that changes is the 
> "time" you get out of bed.

NO.  NO.  NO.

The thing that changes is the definition
that god-damn legislators decide to give
to midnight.

You can get out of bed whenever you wish
on any day of the year so it is...

  UNNECESSARY TO TELL LIES ABOUT THE TIME?

The arguments in favour of DST are all bogus
in my view.  A simple reductio ad absurdum
proof will demonstrate this...

  Let us ACCEPT all the arguments in favour
  of DST.  I have heard that there are fewer
  road accidents, that children are happier,
  the grass is greener and cows give more
  milk.

Well, we can now look at a given time zone
and, by this hypothesis, within that time
zone, there should be fewer accidents in
the west than in the east, and so on.

This doesn't seem to happen.  End of theory.

Did you know that China uses ONE time zone
for its 60-degree expanse of latitude?  Are
there fewer accidents in the west of China
than in the east?  No.

In China they get out of bed at different
clock times in different parts of the country
but the clocks all say the same time (or should
do).

Good for China.  I would go one better and have
UTC worldwide.

For an extreme BAD example take Iran.  Iran has
Daylight Saving [well on and off; it has it at
the moment] but much of it is in the Tropics
where the length of daylight doesn't change
that much during the year.  So what are you
trying to save.  MUCH worse than that...

Iran is a seriously Muslim country and most
people say their prayers five times a day.

When the clocks change the whole pattern of
the working day has to change because, by
the clocks, the prayer times are shifted by
an hour.  Unlike when you get out of bed,
you CAN'T change the prayer times.  They
are handed down by the gods!

Remember what the Native American said when
he heard about Daylight Saving:

  Only a white man could possibly believe
  that by cutting a foot off one end of a
  blanket and stitching it on to the other
  end you get a longer blanket.

Frank King
Cambridge, U.K.


---
https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial

Re: Permanent DST

2016-11-20 Thread Kevin Karney 
Nothing much changes!
UK Daylight Saving Bill - 1909
William Churchill, President of the Board of Trade
… this Bill does not propose a change from Natural Time to Artificial Time, but 
only to substitute a convenient standard of Artificial Time for an inconvenient 
standard of Artificial Time …
Kevin


> On 19 Nov. 2016, at 23:40, John Pickard <john.pick...@bigpond.com> wrote:
> 
> Good morning from sunny Sydney,
> 
> If you think that Europe has a problem with DST, you should try Australia 
> which can only be described as a dog's breakfast. Queensland steadfastly 
> refuses to go on DST because the extra couple of hours of daylight fades the 
> curtains. Although we have a nominal three time zones (AEST, ACST, AWST) 
> there are a couple of towns / villages with times artificially set to be 
> outside the zones they live in. This was originally for commercial reasons, 
> making it easier to do business in adjoining states. These days, such changes 
> are pointless and unnecessary with the internet, but seem to be retained for 
> no particular reason other than to be different. On top of this is DST in 
> various states. As a consequence in summer you can meet more than five 
> different times in Australia which means that on a long trip you can spend a 
> lot of time changing the clocks in cameras, etc.
> 
> Most of us in the southern states like DST (regardless of its effect on our 
> curtains!) and look forward to it at the end of winter. Equally, we don't 
> like when it ends.
> 
> Of course the funniest thing about DST are the arguments of opponents who 
> seem to think that the 24 hour clock is some immutable thing handed down from 
> the gods, rather than a convenient human construct. And if you change the 
> time, then the world as we all know it will come to a shuddering end. These 
> people simply don't understand that the only thing that changes is the "time" 
> you get out of bed. Although I mostly work from 0700 to 1800 or thereabouts, 
> I have done fieldwork in Antarctica and Patagonia where we changed to later 
> starts and finishes because of the extreme winds in the morning. Why start at 
> 0700 and get hammered by wind all morning when you can start at 1200 (when 
> the wind has died down), and work the same number of hours through the 
> afternoon and evening relatively wind-free? So we had breakfast at 1100, hit 
> the ice at 1200 and worked through until about 2200 with almost no wind. Of 
> course, this is only really feasible in high latitudes in summer with very 
> extended daylight hours. But it does show that "time" as shown on a clock 
> face is often irrelevant.
> 
> 
> Cheers, John
> 
> John Pickard
> john.pick...@bigpond.com
> 
> -Original Message- From: Isabella McFedries
> Sent: Saturday, November 19, 2016 4:02 PM
> To: sundial@uni-koeln.de
> Subject: Re: Permanent DST
> 
> In message 
> <cacouayqb2vmbu9l9tcs9bsv_yqmn-wsveul89cx9k9racyt...@mail.gmail.com>
> Dan-George Uza <cerculdest...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> Dear group,
>> 
>> We are witnessing a few interesting developments! After Turkey decided a
>> few months ago to remain on Daylight Saving Time all year round, Hungary is
>> now considering to do the same.
>> 
>> http://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/hungary-mulls-staying-on-daylight-saving-time-all-year-round/
>> 
>> If the measure passes, neighboring countries Hungary and Romania will share
>> the same official time for half of the year although they are located in
>> different time zones (CET and EET respectively). For eastern Hungary the
>> sun sets at about 15:40 during winter, i.e more than an hour ahead of
>> Paris, which shares its time zone.
>> 
>> I'm wondering: aren't EU member states supposed to equally follow DST by
>> law?
>> 
>> 
>> Dan Uza
> 
> 
> Hi, Dan
> 
> You are PARTLY correct - but (as I understand it), all EU member countries
> must CHANGE their clocks on the SAME date, although they still keep their
> individual Time-zones.  For example, UK and Ireland are on GMT, whereas
> France/Germany are on CET, and countries such as Greece on CET + 1 hour.
> 
> There are other examples of locations which are on PERMANENT 'Daylight
> Saving' time - for example here in Canada, the province of Saskatchewan
> should really be in the 'Mountain' zone (GMT-7), but always STAYS in the
> 'Central' zone (GMT-6) and so does NOT change its clocks twice a year.
> 
> I am afraid that these things are always for the Politicians to decide!
> 
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> Isabella McFedries.
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> ---
> https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial 
> ---
> https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial
> 

---
https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial

Re: Permanent DST

2016-11-20 Thread Donald Christensen 
I live in sunny Queensland. There are more problems with DST than fading
curtains. All that extra sunlight makes the water in our lakes evaporate
faster! We can't afford to lose all that water. It also breaks up marriages
becuse DST messes up the times when the couples feel romantic.


Cheers
Donald Christensen
0423 102 090




If you focus on results, you will never change. If you focus on change, you
will get results.

On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 9:40 AM, John Pickard <john.pick...@bigpond.com>
wrote:

> Good morning from sunny Sydney,
>
> If you think that Europe has a problem with DST, you should try Australia
> which can only be described as a dog's breakfast. Queensland steadfastly
> refuses to go on DST because the extra couple of hours of daylight fades
> the curtains. Although we have a nominal three time zones (AEST, ACST,
> AWST) there are a couple of towns / villages with times artificially set to
> be outside the zones they live in. This was originally for commercial
> reasons, making it easier to do business in adjoining states. These days,
> such changes are pointless and unnecessary with the internet, but seem to
> be retained for no particular reason other than to be different. On top of
> this is DST in various states. As a consequence in summer you can meet more
> than five different times in Australia which means that on a long trip you
> can spend a lot of time changing the clocks in cameras, etc.
>
> Most of us in the southern states like DST (regardless of its effect on
> our curtains!) and look forward to it at the end of winter. Equally, we
> don't like when it ends.
>
> Of course the funniest thing about DST are the arguments of opponents who
> seem to think that the 24 hour clock is some immutable thing handed down
> from the gods, rather than a convenient human construct. And if you change
> the time, then the world as we all know it will come to a shuddering end.
> These people simply don't understand that the only thing that changes is
> the "time" you get out of bed. Although I mostly work from 0700 to 1800 or
> thereabouts, I have done fieldwork in Antarctica and Patagonia where we
> changed to later starts and finishes because of the extreme winds in the
> morning. Why start at 0700 and get hammered by wind all morning when you
> can start at 1200 (when the wind has died down), and work the same number
> of hours through the afternoon and evening relatively wind-free? So we had
> breakfast at 1100, hit the ice at 1200 and worked through until about 2200
> with almost no wind. Of course, this is only really feasible in high
> latitudes in summer with very extended daylight hours. But it does show
> that "time" as shown on a clock face is often irrelevant.
>
>
> Cheers, John
>
> John Pickard
> john.pick...@bigpond.com
>
> -Original Message- From: Isabella McFedries
> Sent: Saturday, November 19, 2016 4:02 PM
> To: sundial@uni-koeln.de
> Subject: Re: Permanent DST
>
>
> In message <CACOUaYqB2vmbu9L9Tcs9BSv_YQmn-WsVEuL89cX9k9RACyTimA@mail.
> gmail.com>
>  Dan-George Uza <cerculdest...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Dear group,
>>
>> We are witnessing a few interesting developments! After Turkey decided a
>> few months ago to remain on Daylight Saving Time all year round, Hungary
>> is
>> now considering to do the same.
>>
>> http://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/hungary-mulls-stayi
>> ng-on-daylight-saving-time-all-year-round/
>>
>> If the measure passes, neighboring countries Hungary and Romania will
>> share
>> the same official time for half of the year although they are located in
>> different time zones (CET and EET respectively). For eastern Hungary the
>> sun sets at about 15:40 during winter, i.e more than an hour ahead of
>> Paris, which shares its time zone.
>>
>> I'm wondering: aren't EU member states supposed to equally follow DST by
>> law?
>>
>>
>> Dan Uza
>>
>
>
> Hi, Dan
>
> You are PARTLY correct - but (as I understand it), all EU member countries
> must CHANGE their clocks on the SAME date, although they still keep their
> individual Time-zones.  For example, UK and Ireland are on GMT, whereas
> France/Germany are on CET, and countries such as Greece on CET + 1 hour.
>
> There are other examples of locations which are on PERMANENT 'Daylight
> Saving' time - for example here in Canada, the province of Saskatchewan
> should really be in the 'Mountain' zone (GMT-7), but always STAYS in the
> 'Central' zone (GMT-6) and so does NOT change its clocks twice a year.
>
> I am afraid that these things are always for the Politicians to decide!
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Isabella McFedries.
>
>
> --
>
> ---
> https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial
> ---
> https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial
>
>
---
https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial

Re: Permanent DST

2016-11-19 Thread John Pickard 

Good morning from sunny Sydney,

If you think that Europe has a problem with DST, you should try Australia 
which can only be described as a dog's breakfast. Queensland steadfastly 
refuses to go on DST because the extra couple of hours of daylight fades the 
curtains. Although we have a nominal three time zones (AEST, ACST, AWST) 
there are a couple of towns / villages with times artificially set to be 
outside the zones they live in. This was originally for commercial reasons, 
making it easier to do business in adjoining states. These days, such 
changes are pointless and unnecessary with the internet, but seem to be 
retained for no particular reason other than to be different. On top of this 
is DST in various states. As a consequence in summer you can meet more than 
five different times in Australia which means that on a long trip you can 
spend a lot of time changing the clocks in cameras, etc.


Most of us in the southern states like DST (regardless of its effect on our 
curtains!) and look forward to it at the end of winter. Equally, we don't 
like when it ends.


Of course the funniest thing about DST are the arguments of opponents who 
seem to think that the 24 hour clock is some immutable thing handed down 
from the gods, rather than a convenient human construct. And if you change 
the time, then the world as we all know it will come to a shuddering end. 
These people simply don't understand that the only thing that changes is the 
"time" you get out of bed. Although I mostly work from 0700 to 1800 or 
thereabouts, I have done fieldwork in Antarctica and Patagonia where we 
changed to later starts and finishes because of the extreme winds in the 
morning. Why start at 0700 and get hammered by wind all morning when you can 
start at 1200 (when the wind has died down), and work the same number of 
hours through the afternoon and evening relatively wind-free? So we had 
breakfast at 1100, hit the ice at 1200 and worked through until about 2200 
with almost no wind. Of course, this is only really feasible in high 
latitudes in summer with very extended daylight hours. But it does show that 
"time" as shown on a clock face is often irrelevant.



Cheers, John

John Pickard
john.pick...@bigpond.com

-Original Message- 
From: Isabella McFedries

Sent: Saturday, November 19, 2016 4:02 PM
To: sundial@uni-koeln.de
Subject: Re: Permanent DST

In message 
<cacouayqb2vmbu9l9tcs9bsv_yqmn-wsveul89cx9k9racyt...@mail.gmail.com>

 Dan-George Uza <cerculdest...@gmail.com> wrote:


Dear group,

We are witnessing a few interesting developments! After Turkey decided a
few months ago to remain on Daylight Saving Time all year round, Hungary 
is

now considering to do the same.

http://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/hungary-mulls-staying-on-daylight-saving-time-all-year-round/

If the measure passes, neighboring countries Hungary and Romania will 
share

the same official time for half of the year although they are located in
different time zones (CET and EET respectively). For eastern Hungary the
sun sets at about 15:40 during winter, i.e more than an hour ahead of
Paris, which shares its time zone.

I'm wondering: aren't EU member states supposed to equally follow DST by
law?


Dan Uza



Hi, Dan

You are PARTLY correct - but (as I understand it), all EU member countries
must CHANGE their clocks on the SAME date, although they still keep their
individual Time-zones.  For example, UK and Ireland are on GMT, whereas
France/Germany are on CET, and countries such as Greece on CET + 1 hour.

There are other examples of locations which are on PERMANENT 'Daylight
Saving' time - for example here in Canada, the province of Saskatchewan
should really be in the 'Mountain' zone (GMT-7), but always STAYS in the
'Central' zone (GMT-6) and so does NOT change its clocks twice a year.

I am afraid that these things are always for the Politicians to decide!


Sincerely,

Isabella McFedries.


--

---
https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial 


---
https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial

Re: Permanent DST

2016-11-19 Thread Isabella McFedries 
In message 
  Dan-George Uza  wrote:

> Dear group,
> 
> We are witnessing a few interesting developments! After Turkey decided a
> few months ago to remain on Daylight Saving Time all year round, Hungary is
> now considering to do the same.
> 
> http://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/hungary-mulls-staying-on-daylight-saving-time-all-year-round/
> 
> If the measure passes, neighboring countries Hungary and Romania will share
> the same official time for half of the year although they are located in
> different time zones (CET and EET respectively). For eastern Hungary the
> sun sets at about 15:40 during winter, i.e more than an hour ahead of
> Paris, which shares its time zone.
> 
> I'm wondering: aren't EU member states supposed to equally follow DST by
> law?
> 
> 
> Dan Uza


Hi, Dan

You are PARTLY correct - but (as I understand it), all EU member countries
must CHANGE their clocks on the SAME date, although they still keep their
individual Time-zones.  For example, UK and Ireland are on GMT, whereas
France/Germany are on CET, and countries such as Greece on CET + 1 hour.

There are other examples of locations which are on PERMANENT 'Daylight
Saving' time - for example here in Canada, the province of Saskatchewan
should really be in the 'Mountain' zone (GMT-7), but always STAYS in the
'Central' zone (GMT-6) and so does NOT change its clocks twice a year.

I am afraid that these things are always for the Politicians to decide!


Sincerely,

Isabella McFedries.


-- 

---
https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial