2002-08-11 I think that the controversy with the calendar has a lot to do with how it is to be set up. Traditionalist and even to some extent calendar reformers try to connect the measuring of time with the rotation of the earth around the sun (year), the rotation of the moon around the earth (month) and the rotation of the earth about its own axis (day). Any attempt to revise the present calendar, yet keeping these constraints on it is doomed to failure.
A true metric (SI) calendar would have to be totally independent of these constraints. Cycles of the planets in this solar system and the stars would have to be totally ignored. A true SI calendar in the sense of "cycles" then in actuality could not exist. What would exist is the use of the already existent SI unit the second. A point of origin would have to be decided as time equals zero seconds and all time forward would be measured linearly from that point. If the point of origin is the moment of the big bang, then there would be no negative time. But, a problem exists. We would not be able to know the exact moment of the present time as accurate measurement of time has not been recorded since the moment of the big bang. Events would be recorded as to the exact second they occurred, and events such as age would be determined from the present time subtracting the moment of birth. Thus all differences in time would recorded in seconds and its prefixes. Of course, this will never be adopted, but it is the only true way to measure the passage of time and still be within the framework of SI. As far as I see, calendar reform is a moot issue. We are wasting out time even thinking about it unless we plan to adopt the true SI unit to measure time. As long as we are restricted to measuring time via the sun, the moon and the stars, our present calendar is totally useful and in no need of reforming. Those who do ponder reform have yet to show me a truly workable "calendar" that is superior enough to the present one to cause us all to change. John ----- Original Message ----- From: "Louis JOURDAN" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, 2002-08-11 07:51 Subject: [USMA:21666] Re: Unit names; consumers' rights; duodecimal system > At 20:08 +0000 02/08/10, Brij Bhushan Vij wrote: > >Hi Mike: > > The French failure of the Calendar and Time were not the reasons > >that it lacked its links with the NUMBER system, but the *failure to > >link arc-angle with TIME zones* i.e. the hour-angle. If this was > >done,in that *had the Nautical Kilometre* been defined and linked to > >METRE: as 1/100th of the *grad* it might have survived for some more > >time, or may be could have continued and I would have learned that > >way! > > But, Napoleon's coronation could yet be another reason to abandone > >the *Freedom calendar of France*. Could someone *enlighten me* on > >this since I worked without any information on the subject! > > see > http://perso.wanadoo.fr/louis.jourdan/metrication-en/tempsen.html > > Louis >
