Celestial navigation users might object to the notion that seconds are not important. That is, if you can find anybody still exercising that art. In that arena, folks are taught to read seconds first, then minutes, then hours.
Depending on the latitude, one second can lead to something like 1/4 mile position error. So, realistically, one *might* tolerate a very few seconds error without exceeding reasonable error expectations, but certainly no more. Dana On Sat, Nov 23, 2019 at 9:03 AM Matt Osborn <kc0...@msosborn.com> wrote: > Pretty nice, I've always wondered why clocks weren't designed this > way. Hours last too long and estimating minutes from the hour hand is > minimally useful while seconds are too fast and mostly irrelevant for > human use. > > Reading the time as so many minutes past whichever hour is very > natural and informative. > > On Sat, 23 Nov 2019 09:29:09 +0100, Jean-Louis Rault <f6...@orange.fr> > wrote: > > >Hi all > > > >A friend of mine offered me a secondary electric clock that was in use > >at Observatoire Royal de Belgique, in Brussels, at the end of the 19th > >century. > > > >The manufacturer is Peyer Favarger & Co, Neuchatel, Switzerland. > > > >I'm wondering why the largest hand is used for minutes, and the smaller > >hands for hours and seconds > > > >Any idea ? > > > >Jean-Louis > > -- kc0ukk at msosborn dot com > > _______________________________________________ > time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com > To unsubscribe, go to > http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com > and follow the instructions there. > _______________________________________________ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com To unsubscribe, go to http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com and follow the instructions there.
