Though Steve objected to something that I said in an earlier post, my own reaction to what I said was much worse than anyone else’s criticism could be.
. At first I didn’t understand why I didn’t like what I’d said. But though I meant no implied criticism of a country or its overall population, it could easily have sounded as if such was implied. . The unfortunate words “over there” made it a national statement. …& that gave it a nationalist, political implication. …completely unintended, but nonetheless definitely there. . I’m not political, & want no part of politics or the trouble that accompanies it, national or international. . Because I respect myself too much to want to say something like that, I strongly didn’t like what I’d said. . Though there are other yearstart rules that are typically about 3 time more accurate, the Gregorian leapyear is more than sufficiently accurate, as the following will show: . Maximum Periodic Displacement (mpd): . All calendars are periodically-displaced by oscillation about a middle point. . The Gregorian leapyear rule results in an mpd of 1.5 days. That’s entirely insignificant on the seasonal-scale. . …& I emphasize that that 1.5 days is the **maximum** extreme that the periodic-displacement will reach over the entire 400-year Gregorian cycle. . Unidirectional Drift: . That middle about which the periodic displacement oscillates is, itself, moving unidirectionally in yearstart rules that don’t use an actual astronomical observation, but which, rather, use an arithmetical approximation to the desired year-length. . But that drift-rate can be so small as to be unproblematic over many centuries, or even, with some rules, millennia. . The Gregorian leapyear rule results, currently, in a drift-rate that is now only 43 minutes per century. . >From 1582 to 1982 was exactly one 400-year Gregorian cycle. So the periodic-displacement was zero. But there was unidirectional drift, because the Gregorian leapyear rule is based on an approximation to the length of a Vernal-Equinox tropical-year. . That drift, from 1582 to 1982, was less than 3 hours, in terms of the mean-tropical-year. Not a week, not a day, but less than 3 hours. … i.e., on the average throughout the year, any particular Solar ecliptic longitude occurred at a calendar date-&-time less than 3 hours earlier than it did in 1582. . In fact it was even less still, because the drift-rate was lower in earlier centuries. That’s because the drift rate is accelerating. …because the day-length is increasing, resulting in fewer days in any tropical-year. …thereby increasing the amount by which the Gregorian mean-year of 365.2425 is longer than any one of the various tropical-years, including the mean tropical-year. . So, incidentally, the drift-rate is different for the various tropical-years (… e.g. reckoned at Vernal Equinox vs at Summer Solstice, etc.) . Summary: The Gregorian leapyear rule has only negligible mpd & unidirectional drift-rate. . I should add that I spoke of the mean tropical year instead of the Vernal Equinox year, because that synchronization to the Vernal-Equinox year was only temporary. Though the drift-rate was & is very slow, the difference between the tropical-year lengths is very slight. . When the Gregorian reform was being discussed by Gregorius’ assembled team of astronomers & mathematicians, some wanted a more accurate rule. But it was decided that sufficient accuracy is achieved by the one that they eventually chose. They were right. . The French Republican Calendar (FRC) is a calendar of terrestrial seasonal emphasis. . Litmus Freeman, a remarkably-talented & creative traveling troubadour & calendar-advocate in England proposes a calendar structurally-similar to the FRC. . His calendar, like the FRC, is an ecliptic-months calendar that achieves fixed-ness via blank-days (which I don’t like, but which many calendar-reform advocates don’t object to). . I should just add now that the following 3 calendar-attributes are mutually incompatible: . 1. Accurate ecliptic-months . 2. No blank-days . 3. Fixed-calendar. . Therefore, because I don’t like blank-days, my Ecliptic-Months Calendar proposal wasn’t a fixed calendar. It was identical to the Indian National Calendar, but with a different yearstart rule, & Western Zodiacal names for the ecliptic-months. . Anyway, returning to Freeman’s ecliptic-months calendar: . It’s called the Universal Celestial Calendar (UCC). It is indeed internationally-universal, because it’s celestial. Its celestial nature is strongly emphasized. So one difference between FRC & UCC is that FRC is terrestrial & UCC is celestial. . UCC’s celestial nature is the justification for “Universal” in its name. . Other differences: . Whereas FRC starts its year at the Autumnal Equinox, UCC starts its year at the Vernal Equinox. . Whereas FRC places all of its blank-days together at the end of the year, UCC places one at the beginning of each astronomical quarter, and places the 5th one just before year-start (… i.e., just before the Spring-Quarter’s blank-day). It seaems to me that he 6th blank day, in leapyears goes just before the yearstart one, but I’m not sure. . I should say something about UCC notation. . Freeman writes the day-of-the-month number, & then, separated by a space, the month-designation. . The month designation can consist of the name of the month, or its symbol, or the written-out month-count number of its month, in capital-letters. . In practice, Freeman writes both the written-out month-number & its symbol, the latter two separated by a hyphen to indicate that they’re names for the same thing. . Of course there’s a good practical reason for stating both the month’s name & its number. . Ecliptic-Months Calendars’ yearstart rules: . It’s hard to find information about the Indian National Calendar’s yearstart rule. It seems to me that I heard or read somewhere that it uses an arithmetical-approximation (which is what the Gregorian rule is too). . It’s also hard to find any precise specification of the particulars of FRC’s year-start rule. . All that I could find anywhere on the web was this: . “The Republican calendar year began the day the autumnal equinox <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_equinox> occurred in Paris.” . That implies that the FRC starts its year on the day that contains the Autumnal Equinox. . But that means that the 1st day of the year is designed to **straddle** the Vernal-Equinox, whereas we’d expect that (as nearly as possible) the 1st day of the year (& hence the year) should **start** at the Vernal Equinox. . …like the Persian Solar Hiji, in the description that I found. . So I don’t know which of those two yearstarts was used in the FRC. . The 2nd one would obviously be the one that would try to start the year at the Vernal Equinox….and is the way I’d prefer. . I should add that though the FRC was used with a yearstart based on astronomical determination of each year’s Autumnal Equinox, the French Republican government had decided, before the 1806 ending of the FRC’s use, that they were going to replace the astronomical determination of the Autumnal Equinox with an arithmetical approximation to it. …probably for convenience reasons, real or perceived. As I said our Gregorian rule uses an approximation. . My calendar-proposals would leave the year-numbering system unchanged. . My own South-Solstice Ecliptic-Months Calendar, offered the following arithmetical year-start rule (for use if people chose arithmetical instead of observational): . I’m not sure which day I’d prefer for yearstart. …either Vernal-Equinox, Summer-Solstice or the 1st day of Scorpio (because Scorpio contains Samhain), or the 1st day of Taurus (because Taurus contains Beltane). I’d say I like the Summer Solstice best, so that’s what I’ll speak of here. . The calendar’s 1st year starts on the day that starts closest to the Summer Solstice of [whatever year the calendar starts]. . Each subsequent year starts on the day that starts closest to the time that is Y days after the time that the previous year was chosen to start closest to. . …where Y is the length, in days, of the Summer-Solstice Tropical Year (including the fractional part). . That minimizes the calendrical drift of the Summer-Solstice. . The Summer-Solstice is the ecliptic cardinal-point whose calendrical drift can best be minimized, because the Summer-Solstice tropical year is currently the most nearly constant of the four cardinal ecliptic-points’ tropical years. . Because the precession of the apsides with respect to the equinoxes & solstices has a period of roughly 20,000 years, then each ecliptic cardinal point’s tropical year is the most nearly constant for about 5000 years. So I say that there are four Apsidal Ages. I suggest that we’re privileged to live in the Age of the North-Solstice. . According to Irv Bromberg, & the graphs that he printed-out from commericially-sold celestial-mechanics software, the Summer-Solstice has had the most constant tropical year, among the 4 cardinal points, for about 1000 years. So Irv said something to the effect: “Welcome to the 1st millennium of the Age of the North-Solstice!” . If that’s correct, than this Apsidal Age began roughly around the time of the Norman Conquest, & has about 4000 more years to go. But even when an ecliptic point’s tropical year is no longer the most constant, it remains very constant for a long time after that. . (I can’t guarantee the accuracy of that detail, because it’s only from one source.) . Though the matter of which ecliptic cardinal point has the most constant tropical year is determined by which one is currently closest to our orbital aphelion, the gradual lengthening of the day slightly displaces the most tropical-year-constant ecliptic-longitude a bit away from where our orbital aphelion is. . Anyway, the UCC’s distribution of the blank-days around the year brings some ecliptic-accuracy improvement. But it would be best of all to give the blank-days to the ecliptic-months from Taurus thru Virgo. …& give the leapyear blank-day to Aries. . If it’s objeceted that that distribution wouldn’t be balanced, then I answer that it would be symmetrically balanced about our orbital aphelion. . That’s how the Indian National Calendar gives its 31st day. . Both calendars, FRC & UCC can be beautifully drawn & illustrated. . Though I don’t think there will ever be (or need be) calendar-reform, it might be desired at a Utopian-Epoch, if people want the world to start completely anew, for a complete break with the bad-old-days…including the adoption of a completely new & different calendar. . That’s what I like about alternative calendars. The Utopian-Epoch, & therefore calendar-reform, is Utopian fantasy sci-fi, but what’s wrong with that? . Actuality is over-rated. . Date for current Greenwich Time: . September 25th (Roman-Gregorian) . 1st degree of Libra (astronomical Solar ecliptic longitude—the degree of Libra that the Sun is in)] . 2 degrees into Libra (astronomical distance into Libra rounded to nearest degree) . 3rd of Vendemiaire (FRC) . 3rd of Wheezy (FRC) . 5 SEVEN-Libra (UCC) . 5th of Libra (North Solstice Ecliptic-Months Calendar) . Michael Ossipoff , (FRC is more accurate right now because its starting day is so recent.) On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 3:52 PM Steve Lelievre < [email protected]> wrote: > On 2022-09-21 3:22 a.m., Michael Ossipoff wrote: > > Yes some of you over there like to rely on exaggeration as an attack-tactic > > I hope it's unintentional on your part, but the words "some of you over > there" hint at a prejudice that disrespects not only Frank King but also > others from his part of the world. > > Though we could call every country & city by its earliest known ancient > name, it’s a bit different with a person’s name. > > It is seems pretty evident to me that historical figures of note were > routinely referred to using the name form applicable to the language being > spoken. Indeed, the convention persists today - think of the current pope. > He signs himself as Franciscus on papal papers, but he is routinely called > Francesco in Italian, Francisco in Spanish, François in French, Francis > in English, and so on. > > As well, the idea that the Vatican would allow an unacceptable or > incorrect name form to be used on a tomb inside St. Peter’s Basilica, is > ridiculous. Yet, as Frank mentioned, the tomb uses the name Gregorio. For > confirmation, here is a clip from a photo. > > So, Frank's use of 'Gregory' is the normal practice. I'm not surprised > that he reacted in his quirky way to an unjustified comment. > > > > > >
--------------------------------------------------- https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial
