Editing Talk:2636: What If? 2 Countdown

Jump to: navigation, search
Ambox notice.png Please sign your posts with ~~~~

Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.

The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision Your text
Line 15: Line 15:
 
: I would suggest using 365.2425 days per year, as that's consistent with current leap year conventions. [[User:Dansiman|Dansiman]] ([[User talk:Dansiman|talk]]) 21:49, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
 
: I would suggest using 365.2425 days per year, as that's consistent with current leap year conventions. [[User:Dansiman|Dansiman]] ([[User talk:Dansiman|talk]]) 21:49, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
 
:: Did not see your comment, but already done trivial replacement. No recalculation that goes more complicated than magnitude, though.
 
:: Did not see your comment, but already done trivial replacement. No recalculation that goes more complicated than magnitude, though.
::(For the mathematically curious, in the Gregorian calendar it's normally 365 days, but a leap day every four years (+0.25 => 365.25), except no leap day every century (-0.01 => 365.24), except there is every fourth century (+0.0025 => 365.2425). Which is very very close to the more astronomically-precise figure of 365.2422, at least at this point in our planet's history and definitely over the timescale of the Gregorian calendar itself. ''edit-to-add-convoluted-musings'': A successor system ''might'' need to de-reinstate three of the Four-Millenial leap-days in every 10,000 year period, or perhaps by re-removing four of its various leap-days then re-reinstating one of ''those'' back again, but by the time it's relevent I doubt that 365.2422 is going to be as valid for whatever reason... Hey, by then, maybe we could just deliberately adjust the Earth in or out a bit to make it a better fraction/not a fraction at all! )
+
::(For the mathematically curious, in the Gregorian calendar it's normally 365 days, but a leap day every four years (+0.25 => 365.25), except no leap day every century (-0.01 => 365.24), except there is every fourth century (+0.0025 => 365.2425). Which is very very close to the more astronomically-precise figure of 365.2422, at least at this point in our planet's history and definitely over the timescale of the Gregorian calendar itself.)
 
::On the other hand, the old adage is "no use being precise over imprecise details". One can perhaps apply it to nominal decades (the true average decade; though a given decade might be 10*365 days plus either ''two'' or ''three'' leap-days, for 3652.5±0.5 days in that instance... not equally likely each way, though) but the Generations calculation already ''assumes'' 27 years per generation (not even 27.5, exactly half way between 22 and 33, which already seems a dubious backformation to suit other purposes) and gets a good-enough ''approximate'' number. Using a factor precise to around 1 in 146000 alongside one that's unlikely to be even as accurate as 1 in 54 is a bit rich and overly anal (rather than analytic) in the long-run.
 
::On the other hand, the old adage is "no use being precise over imprecise details". One can perhaps apply it to nominal decades (the true average decade; though a given decade might be 10*365 days plus either ''two'' or ''three'' leap-days, for 3652.5±0.5 days in that instance... not equally likely each way, though) but the Generations calculation already ''assumes'' 27 years per generation (not even 27.5, exactly half way between 22 and 33, which already seems a dubious backformation to suit other purposes) and gets a good-enough ''approximate'' number. Using a factor precise to around 1 in 146000 alongside one that's unlikely to be even as accurate as 1 in 54 is a bit rich and overly anal (rather than analytic) in the long-run.
 
::But this is explainxkcd, so I'm not saying it's misplaced, just that those who would be pedantic about everything (myself included) might find themselves even more out-pedanted in very reasonable circumstances... ;) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.77|172.70.162.77]] 22:47, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
 
::But this is explainxkcd, so I'm not saying it's misplaced, just that those who would be pedantic about everything (myself included) might find themselves even more out-pedanted in very reasonable circumstances... ;) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.77|172.70.162.77]] 22:47, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Please note that all contributions to explain xkcd may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see explain xkcd:Copyrights for details). Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!

To protect the wiki against automated edit spam, we kindly ask you to solve the following CAPTCHA:

Cancel | Editing help (opens in new window)

Template used on this page: