Dear Doug, I enjoyed your message. You end:
> I hope that I have shed some light on the > annual silly debate, and look forward to > some acclaim (I hope) and probably some > protests. In my experience this debate takes place twice a year but, that aside, you may have my acclaim but also my protest! I certainly agree with all your Facts especially the first: > 1. Time can be defined to what we want it to be. Now let us accept this, and all the other Facts, opinions and other arguments. Let us suppose that they way you want time to be defined will indeed reduce accidents, save energy and increase wealth. Let us suppose that it would make the grass greener and encourage the better teaching of Mathematics in schools. So how do you want time to be defined? You don't put it like this but what you are advocating is that: In winter we in the UK should use a close approximation to mean solar time on the meridian 15 degrees east and, in summer, we should use 30 degrees east as the reference meridian. If this is such a good idea (and, by assumption, it *is* a good idea) will you be advocating that those who *live* around 15n degrees east should use 15(n+1) degrees east and 15(n+2) degrees east as their reference meridians in winter and summer respectively? I am also happy to go along with what you describe as your "next point": ... the lack of symmetry of the 'effective day'. Let us say that on average we rise between 7 and 8am, work "9 to 5", have evening leisure and go to bed at 10 - 11pm. It is obvious that the middle of the effective day is about three in the afternoon. Two points here: First, I should like a social historian to explain how this has come about. For most of human history the 'effective day' has, I believe, been what the Romans called 'dies naturalis', the period between sunrise and sunset. This was centred on noon. Secondly, accepting that there has been drift, does this matter? There is no law stopping people getting up earlier if they want a more symmetric day so we may suppose they don't want it. My belief is that people like going to bed late and getting up late. Accordingly, this drift is quite natural but it is also inflationary. It won't be long before you will advocate 15(n+2) and 15(n+3). All your advantages could be achieved by steadily cranking the ratchet back. When I gave a series of lectures at Magdeburg University in the 1980s, I chose the first slot of the day: 7am to 9am. I have tried offering this enlightened timetable to students here and they seem unenthusiastic. BUT, they would happily come to a 7am lecture if we CALLED it 9am. So, seemingly, would you. You are slightly wrong about my rising at 5am. At this time of year my alarm clock is set to 4am, but that's because I keep it at UTC. I solved the problem about staying awake during Fellows' Dinners by being the Presiding Fellow. We start eating at 7:30pm (whatever that means) and finish about 8:30pm. I then make it clear that there is no obligation to stay for the Port! I am coming round to the view that, left to myself, I would live very happily using Babylonian Hours. I would set my Babylonian alarm clock to 23h and so get up an hour before sunrise. I would go to bed about 16h and, at my latitude, that would be about sunset in summer and 8 hours after sunset in winter. It is, alas, unlikely that I will persuade many of this view :-) I am therefore inclined to shift my position. I note your Fact 3: that China uses a single time which covers 60 degrees of longitude, and I note Ruud's question: "Why not a global time zone?" Well, we already have one. It is called UTC. Just look at your e-mail header. You will see it spiced up with +0000, +0100 and +0200. If you have ever tried to set up a conference call with participants in three countries you will see the advantages of having a global time zone. This would also make life easier for sundial designers. All sundials with polar-oriented styles could readily indicate solar time on the reference meridian. There would be no need for a longitude correction and, subject only to the Equation of Time, one could check one's UTC watch at any such sundial on the planet. I will readily back such a proposal. Will you? As you say: > d. We need not be trapped by tradition. All the best Frank --------------------------------------------------- https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial
