Hi Mike: Thnaks for ur response! The fact I left my earlier arguments has been precisely *THIS*; that people are not willing to change from their existing 'FRAME' of mind. The fact, I intended to rtevise my entire thinking process was meant to accomodate all these factors. So, I argued: Why not: a NO CHANGE frame. The year remain 365.24219878125 days; to have 52-Weeks (for 5 years) and ALL years divisible by SIX(6) to have an added 53rd week of the year, as Leap Week of the Year. The Day interval remain that of 24-hours but the HOUR of 60 minutes gets divided into 100 parts and so do seconds (each minute of 100 Decimal seconds). The *Decimal Second* would then work to 1/240000th of the solar day (36% of SI-second) or 1/87658127.7074th of the Tropical Year. Time zones and the grids too DO NOT change. So we retain the 90-degree *Quadrant* but the DEGREE is divided into 100' x100" i.e. to have 10000 arc-seconds; and each minute of *this* is what make the ONE NAUTICAL KILOMETRE, and the METRE need to be redefined in terms of the distance traversed by light in 1/97059575.22th of the 'decimal second' or 1.11194986884 times the present 'metre'. LMT facors or re-adjusment of 'derived units and quantities' is then a mathematical exercise - about which the spade work is already done! I wish any representative of Swatch Watches or the ROLEX fellow contact me in person to explain them the *the GINNIE they see reallly does not exist; but is a representation of 'unmangable' imagination. Well....I see NO PROBLEMS! Brij Bhushan Vij <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>From: "Mike Joy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: [USMA:21481] Re: Proposal For World Calendar >Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2002 14:01:04 +0800 > >Hi BB, > >I am assuming that the lack of response re changing to Decimal Time is now >is hardly the time to do >it! Metrication for Americans is going to take enough resources and >headaches for the near future. > >Of course, there's a good argument for Decimal Time but a few years ago our >friends from Swatch >Watches in Switzerland tried to get us to use internet time (or 'beat >time') but it fizzled. From >comments I heard it was because, while it was a necessary idea, it caused >confusion with the date. A >time of .980 for 2002-07-31 was hard to comprehend in New Zealand where it >was the middle of the day >on 2002-08-01. > >Also it became a nightmare when converting it to degrees latitude. Any >Decimal Time system will have >to mean converting degrees lat. and long. to 100ths of a degree in both >directions, for timezone >allocation and navigation purposes. Now that's going to rattle the sabres >of our seafaring friends >who are wanting to stick to their 'knots' until the end of time. > >So it's a dilemma, and will probably only happen after W.W.9 and when only >5% of the world's >population is still standing. We'll see, (at least our grandchildren >might...) > > >Good luck! > >Mike Joy >Perth, Australia > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "BB VIJ" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2002 6:23 AM >Subject: [USMA:21440] Proposal For World Calendar > > >Marcus, Joe, Bill and friends: > I have seen USMA 21366 - Proposal on Decimal Time. I have not seen any >replies to proposal or >additional information. > It is unfortunate that I do not see many serious enthusiasts to 'see >through' the difficulties >and insist the day to be of TEN hours duration etc. Other than the general >clockwork, the time >zones, the 365-day year re-distribution and rotation of Earth connection >with *geometric angle* i.e. >Hour-Angle; the proposal I sent for realistic examination to USMA >headquarters, has most solutions >that I have attempted to make home into minds. May be I lack in the >approach..... and? > Some relevant factors that additionally need be considered are: >FUTURE CALENDAR MUST MEET THE CRITERIA >(a) to over come discrepancies of the Gregorian calendar and > >provide possible solution to account for 365th and 366th day > >over the 52-weeks (of 7-days in each week) without causing a > >break in the continuation of 'sabbath cycle'; > >(b) apart from these social requirements, the future calendar > >must stand the litmus test for scientific account of planetary > >motions and maintain count of time passage in 'Years/Weeks or > >Months/Days and Time of the Day in Hours-Minutes-Seconds' > >and also keep track of angular motion of spin of the earth in its > >axis; > >(c) to cause minimal changes in 'set mind frame' of humans, > >when dealing with day-to-day activities among NATIONS; > >(d) consideration for ease to manipulate calculations related > > with mathematics (trigonometric functions) and planetary bodies > > and natural or manmade objects in space; > >(e) use of day count during the year for input/output parameters > >in Automatic Data Processing Machines/Systems; and > >Normalisation in science the expression of the instant of an event by >numbering of SI or decimalized >seconds elapsed since origin of an Era or TAI (International Astronomical >Time) - inclusive of >Years, weeks/months and day-count along with part of the hour-minute-second >(solar, sidereal or >other scales). > > I have been attempting to awaken the *will of experts* to join and >reawaken the 'need for a World >Calendar' which had been strayed into politico-religious discussions (as I >imagine - in the absence >of valid information), rather than the socio-scientific values connected >with boosting the SAVINGS >and ease day-to-day activities. A delayed decision is NO DECISION and hence >side-tracking from the >main forum. > Could some body help me in getting in touch with *the reasons of failure >of World Calendar >Proposal of 'Elizabeth Achelis' - then President of World Calendar >Association, New York*? As for >me, I only need petty facility to make America and India proud that 'there >are solutions to >problems'; rather than problems for solutions! > I wish my mail box gets filled with 'healthy arguments'. >Brij Bhushan Vij mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _________________________________________________________________ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
