Re: UTC eller TAI

  • From: Henrik Rosenørn <hrjo@xxxxxxx>
  • To: <astrolist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2011 00:16:39 +0100

Jeg ar fået denne pressemeddelelse om kalenderreformen:

** Science contacts appear below. **

Text & Images:
http://releases.jhu.edu/2011/12/27/time-for-a-change-johns-hopkins-scholars-say-calendar-needs-serious-overhaul/

TIME FOR A CHANGE? SCHOLARS SAY
CALENDAR NEEDS SERIOUS OVERHAUL

Using computer programs and mathematical formulas, Richard Conn Henry,
an astrophysicist in the Krieger School of Arts and Sciences, and
Steve H. Hanke, an applied economist in the Whiting School of
Engineering, have created a new calendar in which each new 12-month
period is identical to the one which came before, and remains that way
from one year to the next in perpetuity.

Under the Hanke-Henry Permanent Calendar, for instance, if Christmas
fell on a Sunday in 2012 (and it would), it would also fall on a
Sunday in 2013, 2014 and beyond. In addition, under the new calendar,
the rhyme “30 days hath September, April, June and November,” would no
longer apply, because September would have 31 days, as would March,
June and December. All the rest would have 30. (Try creating a rhyme
using that.)

“Our plan offers a stable calendar that is absolutely identical from
year to year and which allows the permanent, rational planning of
annual activities, from school to work holidays,” says Henry, who is
also director of the Maryland Space Grant Consortium. “Think about how
much time and effort are expended each year in redesigning the
calendar of every single organization in the world and it becomes
obvious that our calendar would make life much simpler and would have
noteworthy benefits.”

Among the practical advantages would be the convenience afforded by
birthdays and holidays (as well as work holidays) falling on the same
day of the week every year. But the economic benefits are even more
profound, according to Hanke, an expert in international economics,
including monetary policy.

“Our calendar would simplify financial calculations and eliminate what
we call the ‘rip off’ factor,’” explains Hanke. “Determining how much
interest accrues on mortgages, bonds, forward rate agreements, swaps
and others, day counts are required. Our current calendar is full of
anomalies that have led to the establishment of a wide range of
conventions that attempt to simplify interest calculations. Our
proposed permanent calendar has a predictable 91-day quarterly pattern
of two months of 30 days and a third month of 31 days, which does away
with the need for artificial day count conventions.”

According to Hanke and Henry, their calendar is an improvement on the
dozens of rival reform calendars proffered by individuals and
institutions over the last century.

“Attempts at reform have failed in the past because all of the major
ones have involved breaking the seven-day cycle of the week, which is
not acceptable to many people because it violates the Fourth
Commandment about keeping the Sabbath Day,” Henry explains. “Our
version never breaks that cycle.”

Henry posits that his team’s version is far more convenient, sensible
and easier to use than the current Gregorian calendar, which has been
in place for four centuries -- ever since 1582, when Pope Gregory
altered a calendar that was instituted in 46 BC by Julius Caesar.

In an effort to bring Caesar’s calendar in synch with the seasons, the
pope’s team removed 11 days from the calendar in October, so that Oct.
4 was followed immediately by Oct. 15. This adjustment was necessary
in order to deal with the same knotty problem that makes designing an
effective and practical new calendar such a challenge: the fact that
each Earth year is 365.2422 days long.

Hanke and Henry deal with those extra “pieces” of days by dropping
leap years entirely in favor of an extra week added at the end of
December every five or six years. This brings the calendar in sync
with the seasonal changes as the Earth circles the Sun.

In addition to advocating the adoption of this new calendar, Hanke and
Henry encourage the abolition of world time zones and the adoption of
“Universal Time” (formerly known as Greenwich Mean Time) in order to
synchronize dates and times worldwide, streamlining international
business.

“One time throughout the world, one date throughout the world,” they
write in a January
2012 Global Asia article about their proposals. “Business meetings,
sports schedules and school calendars would be identical every year.
Today’s cacophony of time zones, daylight savings times and calendar
fluctuations, year after year, would be over. The economy -- that’s
all of us -- would receive a permanent ‘harmonization’ dividend.”

                           # # #

Science Contacts:
Steve H. Hanke / Richard Conn Henry
+1 410-516-7183 / +1 410-516-7350
hanke@xxxxxxx / henry@xxxxxxx

Website about the Hanke-Henry Permanent Calendar:
http://henry.pha.jhu.edu/calendar.html

Hanke and Henry’s January 2012 Global Asia article about calendar reform:
http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=13940
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-----Oprindelig meddelelse----- 
From: Bjarne Thomsen
Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2011 9:53 PM
To: astrolist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: UTC eller TAI

Forslaget er lidt af en gåde for mig. USNO ser ud til at have
styr på UTC:
http://tycho.usno.navy.mil/mc_to.html
http://tycho.usno.navy.mil/systime.html
http://tycho.usno.navy.mil/what.html
Argumentet for at fjerne skudsekunder gives her af Dennis McCarty:
http://www.astro.oma.be/IAU/COM31/pdf/JD6/JD6_3_McCarthy.pdf
Jeg erindrer ikke at offentligheden har været generet af skudsekunder.
Dage med 86401 sekunder. Hvad med februar med 29 dage?
23h 59m 60s. Der er et problem med analoge ure...
GPS systemet anvender allerede atomtid i sekunder (atomuret på
USNO i Washington) plus et felt til skudsekunder, der har plads
til de næste 1000 år. Hvorfor har man så travlt?
Et andet argument angivet af McCarthy og Klepczynski i GPS World
November 1999 er at "man" vil begynde at lave sin egen definition
uden skudsekunder. Jeg bemærker at han er begyndt at skrive her:
http://www.insidegnss.com/node/1343
Han er IAU's President of Division I Fundamental Astronomy.

Jeg tror at der er tale om et økonomisk problem for industrien,
som inkluderer ure i alle mulige indretninger, f.eks. til
fjernaflæsning af elforbruget.
Det vil blive umådeligt vanskeligt at genindføre skudminutter
eller lignende, hvis man først har fjernet skudsekundet.
Der er for øvrigt problemer med radiotidssignalet, der
angiver UTC-UT1; den eksisterende software forudsætter
at korrektionen er under 1 sekund.

Bjarne Thomsen


On 2011-12-26 14:37, Anders Eisum wrote:
> Det er for galt, dermed mister man jo forbindelsen til de oprindelige 
> tanker om hvad tid er.
> Kan det virkelig være så besværligt at holde fast i skudsekunderne.
>
> Venlig hilsen         Anders
>


Other related posts: