|
|
Re: Why not 13 months? (Was La Systeme Metrique)
Whittet (Whittet@shore.net)
5 Aug 1995 19:17:07 GMT
In article <3vv281$54d@bigbird.csd.sc.edu>, aa101291@dasher.csd.sc.edu says...
>
>pausch@electra.saaf.se (Paul Schlyter) writes:
>> In article <kimbrell-3007952322080001@godzilla11.pixi.com>,
>> C.V. Kimbrell <kimbrell@pixi.com> wrote:
> ...[snip]...
>> > life (and the effects are still seen). - no floor 13 in most buildings,
>>
>> That's because most buildings aren't that tall!! I cannot recall
>> having seen one single building taller than 13 floors where floor
>> number 13 was skipped.
>
>I work on the 13th floor of an office building. Of course, it's occupied
>by an engineering firm :-) PSOB
>
>...[snip]...
>
>> Well, the year is too short to hold 13 months. We shouldn't add a
>> 13'th month just to "prove" we're not afraid of the number 13, should
>> we?
>
>I read some a suggestion some years ago that we adopt a calendar with 13
>months of four weeks each. 4x7x13=364. Add a new years day with the
>appropriate leap day/year correction and you have a system where the the
>nth day of the mth month is the same day of the week every year (if the
>365th day is at the end of the year).
>----
>Benton Bonney, PE
No, its way too simple and logical
every year you celebrate a festival day
and every 4 years there is an extra day off.
this leaves an annual error of 11 min 14 seconds.
so every 16 years you need to make an adjustment of 3 hours
and every 64 years 1 hour more
steve
|