Joining list. Calendar reforms.

[MIKE OSSIPOFF]

             <677CE4DD24B12C4B9FA138534E29FB1D069B5FC6@...>
             A<BLU134-W171027A94EBBC142942C00CF0C0@...>
 <677CE4DD24B12C4B9FA138534E29FB1D069B61D3@...>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Aug 2009 18:51:39.0338 (UTC) FILETIME=[C40A02A0:01CA15FD]


Dear Karl and Calendar People=2C

> It throws some light in his choice of 32.5 degrees. It does not explain
> completely how Mike got his 32.5 degrees value.=20
=20
I was using the daily declination information in Bowditch. I'm now doing th=
e determination again=2C using the hourly declination information in the Na=
utical Almanac. So my ideal solar ecliptic longitude for midnight UT=2C Nor=
thI/1 won't be 32.5=2C but rather will be some nearby longitude determined =
with the Nautical Almanac.
=20
I'm using the Nautical Almanac for 2009=2C but of course this isn't somethi=
ng that will change rapidly from year to year.
=20
Since the year-divisions=2C such as North and South=2C must have whole numb=
ers of weeks=2C I'm doing the determination for various numbers of weeks=2C=
 for the length of North. I'd prefer using 17 weeks=2C unless a different s=
eason-length gets the declination much closer to half-maximum. So far=2C I'=
ve done the determination for 17 weeks. Let me tell my result=2C and then t=
ell how I got it:
=20
Using the Nautical Almanac's more detailed information=2C I got 32.9264 ins=
tead of 32.5  In degrees=2C minutes and seconds=2C 32.9264 is 32 degrees=2C=
 55 minutes=2C and 35 seconds.
=20
Here's how I arrived at that longitude value:
=20
For a North-length of 17 weeks=2C or 119 days:
=20
I looked in the Nautical Almanac's solar declination table=2C for two times=
=2C exactly 119 days apart=2C having the same north declination.
=20
I found two hours that are 119 days apart=2C having very nearly the same no=
rth declination. Then I found the displacement=2C which=2C when applied to =
both of those times (by linear interpolation between two adjacent hours)=2C=
 would give exactly the same north declination at the two new times=2C afte=
r the displacement.=20
=20
The north declination at those two times was .5327 of the maximum declinati=
on of about 23.44 degrees.=20
=20
I calculated the solar ecliptic longitude corresponding to that declination=
. It was 32.9264 degrees=2C or 32 degrees=2C 55 minutes=2C and 35 seconds.=
=20
=20
I'll next do the same determination for other numbers of weeks=2C such as 1=
8 weeks=2C to find out if a number of weeks other than 17 will get a lot cl=
oser to half of maximum declination. Right now I prefer 17 weeks=2C but I'l=
l tell you what I find out. Of course a lower north declination at the begi=
nning and end of North will be gotten by making North longer. So 18 weeks i=
s what I'll try next.
=20
Today I just wanted to tell how I make the determination of the longitude.
=20
Yes=2C the solar ecliptic longitude that I suggest (to keep midnight UT=2C =
NorthI/1 as close to as possible) isn't fundamental to my proposal. Like ot=
her aspects of the proposal=2C such as starting date=2C leapyear rule=2C po=
sition of leapweek=2C etc.=2C I wouldn't dispute a reasonable change in the=
 season-length or longitude that I suggest. As I was saying=2C the importan=
t thing to me is that the calendar be a declination calendar in which North=
 and South have the solar declination roughly in the top half of its north =
and south ranges. If I prefer 17 weeks=2C and others prefer 18 weeks=2C the=
n 18 weeks is fine.
=20
(But=2C as I was saying before=2C my favorite proposal is Subjective Season=
al--the declination calendar is my 2nd choice).
=20
Yes=2C I chose to base it on ecliptic longitude (for the purpose of my choo=
sing the calendar's starting date and determining the value of d for that y=
ear=2C where those two data would become part of my proposal--and for the p=
urpose of explaining  to others how I arrived at my starting date and initi=
al d--because a certain ecliptic longitude is associated with a certain dec=
lination (disregarding changes in obliquity). So first I find the north dec=
lination value shared by two times 17 (or maybe 18) weeks apart. Then I fin=
d the longitude corresponding to that declination. Then=2C for that longitu=
de=2C I find a starting date (for whatever year we agree should be used) th=
at minimizes d for that year. That starting date and that value of initial =
d become part of my proposal.
=20
I understand that people here tend to favor a calendar starting date in ret=
roactive-Gregorian 1 A.D. I have no objection to that.
=20
The Subjective Seasonal calendar has a name=2C so as to distinuish it from =
other terrestrial seasonal calendars. Asimov proposed one=2C and someone he=
re (Mark?) suggested that our existing months=2C with New Year's day on Mar=
ch 1=2C could be considered a terrestrial seasonal calendar (I agree=2C but=
 Subjective Seasonal is the best one that I know of).
=20
My declination calendar is the only declination calendar proposal that I've=
 heard of=2C and so I haven't given it a name. I just call it the declinati=
on calendar.
=20
Karl and Yiping have proposed "longitude astronomical seasonal" calendars. =
(Earlier=2CI mistakenly called Yiping's calendar a terrestrial seasonal cal=
endar). Let me say what I mean by "longitude astronomical seasonal"=2C by w=
riting=2C here=2C my suggested classification of seasonal calendars:
=20
Seasonal Calendars:
=20
1. Terrestrial Seasonal Calendars:
.......(Calendars that are intended to represent=2C by their year-divisions
....... [and usually by the names of the year-divisions] the Earth's natura=
l seasons)
=20
2. Astronomical  Seasonal Calendars:
.......(Calendars based on the sun's longitude or declination)
=20
..............2A. Longitude Calendars
.....................(Calendars whose largest year divisions are fundamenta=
lly
..................... based on solar ecliptic longitudes)
=20
..............2B. Declination Calendars
.....................(Calendars whose largest year divisions are fundamenta=
lly=20
.....................based on the value of solar declination)
=20
=20
[The dots at the beginning of some lines are intended as place-holders=2C b=
ecause blanks aren't always preserved in e-mail. But the dots still don't g=
uarantee that this will post as intended]
=20
Mike Ossipoff
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20

>=20
>=20
> Karl
>=20
> 10(11(15
>=20
>=20
> -----Original Message-----
> From: East Carolina University Calendar discussion List
> [mailto:CALNDR-L@...] On Behalf Of MIKE OSSIPOFF
> Sent: 05 August 2009 00:49
> To: CALNDR-L@...
> Subject: Re: Declination calendar details without escapes
>=20
>=20
>> I found a declination table at
>> http://www.wsanford.com/~wsanford/exo/sundials/DEC_Sun.html (referred
> to
>> by Wikipedia) which claims to be an average over a four-year leap year
>> cycle=2C but it does not state which four year leap year cycle it is
>> averaging over. I don't think it is really averaging over any
> particular
>> four-year leap year cycle=2C but is assuming the mean declination for
>> March 21 is exactly zero.
>=20
> I used a declination table in Bowditch. It was for 2007=2C but the
> important thing is the _duration_ for which the north declination is
> above some particular value that is close to half-maximum. So any
> reasonably nearby year will do. I wanted that duration (the length of
> North) to be a whole number of weeks. I rounded down to 17 weeks instead
> of up to 18 weeks=2C in order to get closer to the North-duration of the
> Subjective Seasonal Calendar. I did that even though 18 weeks would have
> put the north declination at the typical NorthI/1 a little closer to
> half of the maximum north declination.
>=20
> Having found=2C from that table=2C what declination I wanted=2C for the
> beginning and end of North=2C I calculated the corresponding solar
> ecliptic longitude=2C and got something close to 32.5 It seems to me that
> I got 32.47=2C which I rounded to 32.5
>=20
> For this calendar=2C there'd be no objection to moving leapweek into
> North. It's only in the nonfixed version of Subjective Seasonal that I
> want leapweek in South=2C in order to make NorthI/1 always correspond to
> Gregorian June 1 (which is possible because=2C for that calendar=2C I'd k=

eep
> the Gregorian leapyear system=2C largely for proposal-simplicity).
>=20
> And of course=2C in general=2C I don't dispute any changes in leapyear-ru=
le=2C
> starting date=2C positioning of leapweek=2C etc. The important thing to m=
e
> is that a new calendara be either a terrestrial seasonal calendar (a
> good one like Subjective Seasonal) or a declination calendar. mY first
> choice is Subjective Seasonal or another similarly good terrestrial
> seasonal calendar. My 2nd choice is a declination calendar. Beyond that=
=2C

> wouldn't dispute any changes in details such as those I listed at the
> beginning of this paragraph.
>=20
> Mike Ossipoff
>=20
>=20
>=20
> _________________________________________________________________
> Windows Live(tm): Keep your life in sync.
> http://windowslive.com/explore?ocid=3DPID23384::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:NF_=

B
> R_sync:082009
> --=20
> Scanned by iCritical.
>=20
_________________________________________________________________
Get back to school stuff for them and cashback for you.
http://www.bing.com/cashback?form=3DMSHYCB&publ=3DWLHMTAG&crea=3DTEXT_MSHYC=
B_BackToSchool_Cashback_BTSCashback_1x1=

[Karl Palmen]

Dear Mike and Calendar People

Thank you Mike for the details of your method, even though the note is
mucked up (please report this to Microsoft).

It seems to me what Mike has chosen to do is to find the 17 week period
containing the Northern solstice so that the declination is equal at
start and end and then work out the ecliptic longitude of the start of
this period.

This is just one of four possible methods:

(2) Do the same, but with the period containing the Southern Solstice.
(3) Find a period of 9 weeks containing the Northward Equinox such that
the declination at start and end are equal and opposite.
(4) As (3), but for period containing Southward Equinox

One of these four methods is not valid and this is the one where the
period takes the leap week.
Hence Mike's method is not valid if the North period takes the leap
week.

The valid three of the four methods also give rise to slightly different
results.

The invalid method can be made valid extending the period by about 1 day
6 hours to its mean duration taking account of leap weeks.


Using the declination figures of
http://www.wsanford.com/~wsanford/exo/sundials/DEC_Sun.html , which are
actually relative to the Northward Equinox, I thought I'd try different
variations of fitting four days as close as possible to mid value
declination (11 degrees 43 minutes). I choose the Northward season to
take the leap week, merely because one then does not need to use
interpolation to get any of the four declinations.

Dates are specified as days after the Northward equinox followed by
declination in (degrees:minutes) sign ignored:
31 days (11:39),  150 days (13:18), 213 days (10:07),  332 days (12:37)
32 days (12:00),  151 days (12:59), 214 days (10:29),  333 days (12:16)
33 days (12:20),  152 days (12:39), 215 days (10:50),  334 days (11:55)
34 days (12:40),  153 days (12:19), 216 days (11:12),  335 days (11:34)
35 days (13:00),  154 days (11:59), 217 days (11:33),  336 days (11:13)
36 days (13:19),  155 days (11:39), 218 days (11:54),  337 days (10:52)
One would get a better fit if one had the North season take the leap
week. The Declination figures would be the same as above except the
first column would have 364 days added and 25 minutes removed (1.25
days) by interpolation.

The figures also show that Mike's method would place the start of North
about 33.5 days after the equinox with a declination of about twelve and
a half degrees, which is what Mike got. Apply method (2) and you get
34.5 days after the equinox and method (4) also gives 34.5 days.
Applying method (3) for leap week in North gives 33+364 days (equivalent
to 31.75 days).

Karl

10(11(16

-----Original Message-----
From: East Carolina University Calendar discussion List
[mailto:CALNDR-L@...] On Behalf Of MIKE OSSIPOFF
Sent: 05 August 2009 19:52
To: CALNDR-L@...
Subject: Re: Declination calendar details without escapes



Dear Karl and Calendar People=2C

> It throws some light in his choice of 32.5 degrees. It does not
explain
> completely how Mike got his 32.5 degrees value.=20
=20
I was using the daily declination information in Bowditch. I'm now doing
th=
e determination again=2C using the hourly declination information in the
Na=
utical Almanac. So my ideal solar ecliptic longitude for midnight UT=2C
Nor=
thI/1 won't be 32.5=2C but rather will be some nearby longitude
determined =
with the Nautical Almanac.
=20
I'm using the Nautical Almanac for 2009=2C but of course this isn't
somethi=
ng that will change rapidly from year to year.
=20
Since the year-divisions=2C such as North and South=2C must have whole
numb=
ers of weeks=2C I'm doing the determination for various numbers of
weeks=2C=
 for the length of North. I'd prefer using 17 weeks=2C unless a
different s=
eason-length gets the declination much closer to half-maximum. So far=2C
I'=
ve done the determination for 17 weeks. Let me tell my result=2C and
then t=
ell how I got it:
=20
Using the Nautical Almanac's more detailed information=2C I got 32.9264
ins=
tead of 32.5  In degrees=2C minutes and seconds=2C 32.9264 is 32
degrees=2C=
 55 minutes=2C and 35 seconds.
=20
Here's how I arrived at that longitude value:
=20
For a North-length of 17 weeks=2C or 119 days:
=20
I looked in the Nautical Almanac's solar declination table=2C for two
times=
=2C exactly 119 days apart=2C having the same north declination.
=20
I found two hours that are 119 days apart=2C having very nearly the same
no=
rth declination. Then I found the displacement=2C which=2C when applied
to =
both of those times (by linear interpolation between two adjacent
hours)=2C=
 would give exactly the same north declination at the two new times=2C
afte=
r the displacement.=20
=20
The north declination at those two times was .5327 of the maximum
declinati=
on of about 23.44 degrees.=20
=20
I calculated the solar ecliptic longitude corresponding to that
declination=
. It was 32.9264 degrees=2C or 32 degrees=2C 55 minutes=2C and 35
seconds.=


--
Scanned by iCritical.

[zengyiping]

Some parts of this message have been removed. Learn more about Nabble's security policy.

Dear Mike and all calendar people,
After I read your two goars I begin understand  why you work out the Declination Calendar and why your northI/1 in declination Calendar is 32.5 degrees.
I am waiting for your completed proposals include Subjective Seasonal Calendar(fixed and non-fixed) and Declination Calendar. Then I can comment them.
I want you comment my proposal too.

Yiping Zeng 6/Aug/2009

> Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 00:00:32 +0000
> From: nkklrp@...
> Subject: Re: Declination Calendar Month Table RE: Declination calendar details without escapes
> To: CALNDR-L@...
>
>
> Dear Yiping,
>
>
> > But I think that ecliptic longitude of June 1 is about 70 degree.
> > It is'nt?
>
> I'd have to check. But let me re-state my goals that led me to 32.5 degrees:
>
> 1. I wanted the longitude at which the north solar ecliptic longitude enters the north half of its range, as nearly as feasible.
>
> 2. I wanted, while achieving goal #1, for the length of North to be as close as possible to the length of North in the Subjective Seasonal Calendar, which attempts to match the average seasons in the temperate zones.
>
> Yes, now that you mention it, it occurs to me that seaonal lag creates a difference between the declination calendar's NorthI/1 and that of the Subjective Seasonal Calendar, and therefore a distance between the declination calendar's NorthI/1 and june 1.
>
> With the seasons' lengths matching those of the average perceived seasons in the temperate world, the declination calendar can be related to the seasons by merely adjusting for a region's timelag.
>
> Mike Ossipoff
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your vacation photos on your phone!
> http://windowsliveformobile.com/en-us/photos/default.aspx?&OCID=0809TL-HM

---

与任何您希望的人分享您的回忆。 任何您希望的人。

[MIKE OSSIPOFF]

             <677CE4DD24B12C4B9FA138534E29FB1D069B5FC6@...>
             A<BLU134-W171027A94EBBC142942C00CF0C0@...>
 <677CE4DD24B12C4B9FA138534E29FB1D069B61D3@...>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Aug 2009 16:48:03.0077 (UTC) FILETIME=[AA042350:01CA16B5]



Because I'm using the 2009 Nautical Almanac=2C then=2C instead of the rough=
 value of 23.44=2C I should use the average obliquity for April through Aug=
ust=2C 2009.
=20
Mike Ossipoff
=20
_________________________________________________________________
Get free photo software from Windows Live
http://www.windowslive.com/online/photos?ocid=3DPID23393::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:e=
n-US:SI_PH_software:082009=

[MIKE OSSIPOFF]

 
Dear Karl and Calendar People,
 
I hope that the latest message-muck-up only meant that I forgot to switch to plaintext, and that it isn't something that is going to happen unavoidably. Yes, I guess it's time to report it to microsoft.
 
At the time that I posted my proposal, I didn't know about the advantage of having the leapweek in North. So of course now I understand that, with leapweek in North, there's good reason to base the calendar's relation to ecliptic longitude on one of the other seasons.
 

> Thank you Mike for the details of your method, even though the note is
> mucked up (please report this to Microsoft).
>
> It seems to me what Mike has chosen to do is to find the 17 week period
> containing the Northern solstice so that the declination is equal at
> start and end and then work out the ecliptic longitude of the start of
> this period.
>
> This is just one of four possible methods:
>
> (2) Do the same, but with the period containing the Southern Solstice.
> (3) Find a period of 9 weeks containing the Northward Equinox such that
> the declination at start and end are equal and opposite.
> (4) As (3), but for period containing Southward Equinox
>
> One of these four methods is not valid and this is the one where the
> period takes the leap week.
> Hence Mike's method is not valid if the North period takes the leap
> week.
>
> The valid three of the four methods also give rise to slightly different
> results.
>
> The invalid method can be made valid extending the period by about 1 day
> 6 hours to its mean duration taking account of leap weeks.
>
>
> Using the declination figures of
> http://www.wsanford.com/~wsanford/exo/sundials/DEC_Sun.html , which are
> actually relative to the Northward Equinox, I thought I'd try different
> variations of fitting four days as close as possible to mid value
> declination (11 degrees 43 minutes).

 
For the nonfixed version--But, for the fixed calendar, for greatest calendar convenience, you want all the year-divisions to have whole numbers of weeks, and so the boundaries of North and South will have declination differing somewhat from the actual mid-value.
 
Must sign off now. Will resume later.
 
Mike Ossipoff
 
_________________________________________________________________
Get free photo software from Windows Live
http://www.windowslive.com/online/photos?ocid=PID23393::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:SI_PH_software:082009

[MIKE OSSIPOFF]

Dear Karl and Calendar People,
 
That having leapweek in North works better is one of those things that wouldn't have occurred to me, so thanks for pointing it out. There are things like that (and like the computational advantage of a starting date in retroactive-Gregorian 1 A.D.), which you more experienced calendarists know about, but which are a bit beyond my beginner's understanding. Likewise, anything to do with nutation or changes in the Earth's orbit, such as the determination of tropical-year-length with respect to various ecliptic longitudes. So, depending on what ecliptic longitude one is looking at, 1.24219 days isn't the most accurate annual calendar shift with respect to the natural seasons, and it varies according to the longitude of interest. It had never even occurred to me that orbital changes would matter for calendars. It now seems a calendarist must be at least a student of celestial mechanics.
 
But I understand that, for the declination calendar, with leapweek in North, it's then better to base the calendar's relation to longitude on one of the other seasons.
 
Mike Ossipoff
 
_________________________________________________________________
Get back to school stuff for them and cashback for you.
http://www.bing.com/cashback?form=MSHYCB&publ=WLHMTAG&crea=TEXT_MSHYCB_BackToSchool_Cashback_BTSCashback_1x1

[MIKE OSSIPOFF]

Dear Yiping and Calendarists,
 
Immediate preliminary comments on your proposal as I remember it:
 
It is a longitude astronomical-seasonal calendar, with its four astronomical seasons being equal, as measured by distance on the ecliptic. The four astronomical seasons are centered on the equinoxes and solstices.
 
Your centering of the astronomical seasons is like that of my declination calendar, and the difference is that you base the astronomical seasons on longitude and I base them on declination (hence the unequal lengths of my astronomical seasons, as measured in days or in longitude degrees). I recongnize that either is equally valid. I prefer declination because it's closer to the natural seasons: The sun's changes in longitude, its motion on the ecliptic, of course gives us the changing declinations, which of course give us the seasons. So I feel that a declination calendar relates more directly to the seasons.
 
When the north solar declination passes its half-maximum point, northbound, we know that this is what is going to give us the perception of summer in the northern hemisphere, around June 1, when the terrestrial temperatures catch up.
 
And, therefore, if you know the seasonal time-lag where you live, you can easily interpret the declination calendar as a terrestrial-seasonal calendar, by applying that lag.
 
Mike Ossipoff
 
 
 
 
 
_________________________________________________________________
Get back to school stuff for them and cashback for you.
http://www.bing.com/cashback?form=MSHYCB&publ=WLHMTAG&crea=TEXT_MSHYCB_BackToSchool_Cashback_BTSCashback_1x1

[zengyiping]

Some parts of this message have been removed. Learn more about Nabble's security policy.

Dear Mike and all calendar people,
If new year's day of Gregorian calendar move foreward 13 days(to Jan 13), then Mike's NorthI/1 of Subjective Calendar must be Dec 14th and length of South season must be
91 days(13 weeks).So his Declination Calendar must have four equal seasons(each has four 13 weeks).It's NorthI/1 will be near Nov 7th and Southwardi/1 will be near
Feb 4th.If people take southwardI/1 as new year's day, this calendar almost be the same as my astronomical calendar(except leap rule).
Thus it can be seen that Dec 1st being as start of Winter season is a random date ,so the length of winter season being 117 day(or 118 or 119 days) has not sientific
base. A world calendal shoud be based on a scientfic base.
Mike said that most people consider Dec 1 as start of Winter season. May be it is true. But it is because peaple like full months in seasons. It can't be evidence of
reasonable start of season.

Yiping Zeng 8/Aug/2009

> Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 18:11:01 +0000
> From: nkklrp@...
> Subject: Re: Declination Calendar Month Table RE: Declination calendar details without escapes
> To: CALNDR-L@...
>
> Dear Yiping and Calendarists,
>
> Immediate preliminary comments on your proposal as I remember it:
>
> It is a longitude astronomical-seasonal calendar, with its four astronomical seasons being equal, as measured by distance on the ecliptic. The four astronomical seasons are centered on the equinoxes and solstices.
>
> Your centering of the astronomical seasons is like that of my declination calendar, and the difference is that you base the astronomical seasons on longitude and I base them on declination (hence the unequal lengths of my astronomical seasons, as measured in days or in longitude degrees). I recongnize that either is equally valid. I prefer declination because it's closer to the natural seasons: The sun's changes in longitude, its motion on the ecliptic, of course gives us the changing declinations, which of course give us the seasons. So I feel that a declination calendar relates more directly to the seasons.
>
> When the north solar declination passes its half-maximum point, northbound, we know that this is what is going to give us the perception of summer in the northern hemisphere, around June 1, when the terrestrial temperatures catch up.
>
> And, therefore, if you know the seasonal time-lag where you live, you can easily interpret the declination calendar as a terrestrial-seasonal calendar, by applying that lag.
>
> Mike Ossipoff
>
>
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get back to school stuff for them and cashback for you.
> http://www.bing.com/cashback?form=MSHYCB&publ=WLHMTAG&crea=TEXT_MSHYCB_BackToSchool_Cashback_BTSCashback_1x1

---

您可以借助 Windows Live 整理、编辑和 共享您的照片。

[zengyiping]

Some parts of this message have been removed. Learn more about Nabble's security policy.

Dear Mike and calendar people,
Mike's Subjective Calendar is a calendar with 38 day timelag.  Obviously it is a local seasonal calendar.
Subjective calendar with any timelag is still a local seasonal calendar except its timelag equal zero.
If its timelag equal zero, its seasons become astronomical seasons. Astronomical seasons are globe or world seasons.So this
calendar becoms a astronnomical seasonal calendar.Then we can call it World Astronomical Seasonal Calendar or World Seasonal Calendar.
For convenian and neatness astronomical seasons naturally be equal(or near equal for time).So a world astronomical seasonal calendar must has four equar seasons. My
Natural World Calendar just is this calendar.
Mike's Declination Calendar is a zero-timelag seadonal calendar, but it has unequal four seasons. If its four seasons change to equal,it'll became a world astronomical
seasonal calendar.It'll become the same proposal as mine.

Yiping Zeng 9/Aug/2009

> Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 18:11:01 +0000
> From: nkklrp@...
> Subject: Re: Declination Calendar Month Table RE: Declination calendar details without escapes
> To: CALNDR-L@...
>
> Dear Yiping and Calendarists,
>
> Immediate preliminary comments on your proposal as I remember it:
>
> It is a longitude astronomical-seasonal calendar, with its four astronomical seasons being equal, as measured by distance on the ecliptic. The four astronomical seasons are centered on the equinoxes and solstices.
>
> Your centering of the astronomical seasons is like that of my declination calendar, and the difference is that you base the astronomical seasons on longitude and I base them on declination (hence the unequal lengths of my astronomical seasons, as measured in days or in longitude degrees). I recongnize that either is equally valid. I prefer declination because it's closer to the natural seasons: The sun's changes in longitude, its motion on the ecliptic, of course gives us the changing declinations, which of course give us the seasons. So I feel that a declination calendar relates more directly to the seasons.
>
> When the north solar declination passes its half-maximum point, northbound, we know that this is what is going to give us the perception of summer in the northern hemisphere, around June 1, when the terrestrial temperatures catch up.
>
> And, therefore, if you know the seasonal time-lag where you live, you can easily interpret the declination calendar as a terrestrial-seasonal calendar, by applying that lag.
>
> Mike Ossipoff
>
>
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get back to school stuff for them and cashback for you.
> http://www.bing.com/cashback?form=MSHYCB&publ=WLHMTAG&crea=TEXT_MSHYCB_BackToSchool_Cashback_BTSCashback_1x1

---

您可以借助 Windows Live 整理、编辑和 共享您的照片。

[MIKE OSSIPOFF]

Dear Yiping, you wrote:

If new year's day of Gregorian calendar move foreward 13 days(to Jan 13)...
 
I reply:
 
But why would the Gregorian calendar's New Year's Day move? Not by my proposal, or any other that I know of.
 
You continued:
 
, then Mike's NorthI/1 of Subjective Calendar must be Dec 14th
 
I reply:
 
No, by definition, In short, NorthI/1 is kept as close as possible to the average June 1.
 
After all, it's my proposal, and so I say when NorthI/1 is.
 
You continued:
 
and length of South season must be
91 days(13 weeks).So his Declination Calendar must have four equal seasons
 
I reply:
 
No. By definition, Subjective Seasonal has unequal seasons. For the fixed version, which I've posted in detail, North & South are 17 weeks. Northward and Southward are 9 weeks.
 
Subjective Seasonal has unequal seasons because Mike says it does. One nice thing about making up a proposal is that you can have it the way you want it--even if it never gets adopted :-)
 
You continued:
 
(each has four 13 weeks).It's NorthI/1 will be near Nov 7th and Southwardi/1 will be near
Feb 4th.If people take southwardI/1 as new year's day,
 
I reply:
 
I must admit that I hadn't previously heard about that "Subjective Seasonal Calendar", which is entirely different from the one that I have defined. I suggest that you give it a different name, because the name "Subjective Seasonal Calendar" is already taken.
 
You continue:
 
You 117 day(or 118 or 119 days) has not sientific
base.
 
I reply:
 
I must admit that I don't know what you mean by that. It's true that many people nowadays are science-worshipers, and, if that is your religion, then I respect it even though I don't believe in it.
 
What kind of a "science basis" do you want a calendar to have?? The lengths of the Subjective Seasonal calendar seasons are determined by 1) the days that are pretty much universally accepted as the beginnings of the North and South extreme declination seasons; and 2) the typical midrange seasonal timelag in the world's temperate zones. I'm sorry if that isn't "scientific" enough for you.
 
You're carrying your science religion too far. It's silly to try to say that everything should be scientific. If pretty much everyone feels that summer begins June 1 in the north and December 1 in the south, then that's what summer means.
 

You continued:
 
Mike said that most people consider Dec 1 as start of Winter season. May be it is true. But it is because peaple like full months in seasons. It can't be evidence of
reasonable start of season.

I reply:
 
But they don't say summer begins October 1st or July 1st, or May 1st. June 1 is what they say. If you don't want to go by what people say, that's your choice of course. June 1 is a good approximation to what people would call the beginning of summer, even if there were no months.
 
I meant no disparagement of your science-worship religion. I merely mention to you that you can't expect to impose it on others.
 
Mike Ossipoff
 
_________________________________________________________________
Express your personality in color! Preview and select themes for Hotmail®.
http://www.windowslive-hotmail.com/LearnMore/personalize.aspx?ocid=PID23391::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HYGN_express:082009

[MIKE OSSIPOFF]

Dear Yiping and Calendar People,
 
You wrote:

> Mike's Subjective Calendar is a calendar with 38 day timelag.
 
I reply:
 
Correct.
 
You continue:
 
 
Obviously it is a local seasonal calendar.
 
I reply:
 
No, it's an average temperate-zone terrestrial seasonal calendar.
 
You continued:

> Subjective calendar with any timelag is still a local seasonal calendar except its timelag equal zero.
 
I reply:
 
No. The declination calendar is globally completely accurate, because the declination is the same everywhere. Subjective Seasonal isn't claimed to exactly match the timelag everywhere. Only the typical midrange timelag of the temperate zones.
 
You continued:
 

> If its timelag equal zero, its seasons become astronomical seasons. Astronomical seasons are globe or world seasons.So this
> calendar becoms a astronnomical seasonal calendar.Then we can call it World Astronomical Seasonal Calendar or World Seasonal Calendar.
 
I reply:
 
No, then I call it my declination calendar. With the 38 day lag, I call it Subjective Seasonal Calendar. By the way, the name "World Season Calendar" is already taken, by Isaac Asimov.

> For convenian and neatness astronomical seasons naturally be equal(or near equal for time).So a world astronomical seasonal calendar must has four equar seasons.
 
I reply:
 
Nonsense. Seasons are as defined by the proposer.
 
 
_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live™: Keep your life in sync.
http://windowslive.com/explore?ocid=PID23384::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:NF_BR_sync:082009

[MIKE OSSIPOFF]

 
Let me continue my reply:
 
Yiping, you wrote:
 
If its timelag equal zero, its seasons become astronomical seasons.
 
I reply:
 
Correct. Timelag is only applicable to terrestrial seasonal calendars. Astronomical seasonal calendars have no timelag.
 
 
You continue:
 
 
Astronomical seasons are globe or world seasons.
 
I reply:
 
Yes, astronomical seasons are accurate everywhere, because the sun's ecliptic longitude and declination are the same worldwide. (when defined with reference to the Earth's center)
 
You continued:
 
So this
calendar becoms a astronnomical seasonal calendar.Then we can call it World Astronomical Seasonal Calendar or World Seasonal Calendar.
 
I reply:
 
"World Astronomical Seasonal Calendar" would have an unnecessary word, because any calendar in general use is a world calendar.
 
Also, "astronomical seasonal" is a broad category, not a specific calendar. Astronomical seasonal calendars can be longitude or declination calendars.
 
You continue:

For convenian and neatness astronomical seasons naturally be equal(or near equal for time).So a world astronomical seasonal calendar must has four equar seasons.
 
I reply:
 
According to you. What you're saying is that you prefer a longitude calendar to a declination calendar. No one is criticizing your preference. I merely don't share it.
 
You want the ecliptic divided equally, and I prefer to base the calendar on the declination. Declination is more closely related  to our seasons.
 
You continue:
 
My
Natural World Calendar just is this calendar.
 
I reply:
 
That isn't a descriptive name: Any seasonal calendar of any description can be called a natural calendar. And any calendar in general use is a "world calendar".
 
Your proposal, as I said, is a longitude astronomical seasonal calendar.
 
You continue:
 
Mike's Declination Calendar is a zero-timelag seadonal calendar
 
I reply:
 
Correct.
 
You continue:
 
, but it has unequal four seasons.
 
I reply:
 
Correct again.
 
You continue:
 
 
If its four seasons change to equal,it'll became a world astronomical
seasonal calendar.
 
I reply:
 
It also wouldn't be my proposal.
 
It would then probably be intended as a longitude calendar, but that is not what I want.
 
Mike Ossipoff
 
_________________________________________________________________
Get free photo software from Windows Live
http://www.windowslive.com/online/photos?ocid=PID23393::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:SI_PH_software:082009

[Karl Palmen]

Dear Mike and Calendar People

-----Original Message-----
From: East Carolina University Calendar discussion List
[mailto:CALNDR-L@...] On Behalf Of MIKE OSSIPOFF
Sent: 06 August 2009 18:12
To: CALNDR-L@...
Subject: Re: Declination calendar details without escapes

 
Dear Karl and Calendar People,
 
I hope that the latest message-muck-up only meant that I forgot to
switch to plaintext, and that it isn't something that is going to happen
unavoidably. Yes, I guess it's time to report it to microsoft.
 
At the time that I posted my proposal, I didn't know about the advantage
of having the leapweek in North. So of course now I understand that,
with leapweek in North, there's good reason to base the calendar's
relation to ecliptic longitude on one of the other seasons.
 
> Thank you Mike for the details of your method, even though the note is
> mucked up (please report this to Microsoft).
>
> It seems to me what Mike has chosen to do is to find the 17 week
period
> containing the Northern solstice so that the declination is equal at
> start and end and then work out the ecliptic longitude of the start of
> this period.
>
> This is just one of four possible methods:
>
> (2) Do the same, but with the period containing the Southern Solstice.
> (3) Find a period of 9 weeks containing the Northward Equinox such
that
> the declination at start and end are equal and opposite.
> (4) As (3), but for period containing Southward Equinox
>
> One of these four methods is not valid and this is the one where the
> period takes the leap week.
> Hence Mike's method is not valid if the North period takes the leap
> week.
>
> The valid three of the four methods also give rise to slightly
different
> results.
>
> The invalid method can be made valid extending the period by about 1
day
> 6 hours to its mean duration taking account of leap weeks.
>
>
> Using the declination figures of
> http://www.wsanford.com/~wsanford/exo/sundials/DEC_Sun.html , which
are
> actually relative to the Northward Equinox, I thought I'd try
different
> variations of fitting four days as close as possible to mid value
> declination (11 degrees 43 minutes).
 
For the nonfixed version--But, for the fixed calendar, for greatest
calendar convenience, you want all the year-divisions to have whole
numbers of weeks, and so the boundaries of North and South will have
declination differing somewhat from the actual mid-value.

KARL SAYS: What then followed was intended for a leap week (fixed)
calendar.
What I forgot to say, because I thought it was obvious, was that each
row of the table corresponds to a possible average placing of the starts
of seasons of 9 or 17 whole weeks (63 or 119 days).

I quote it again with [] added:


Using the declination figures of
http://www.wsanford.com/~wsanford/exo/sundials/DEC_Sun.html , which are
actually relative to the Northward Equinox, I thought I'd try different
variations of fitting four days [starting seasons of 17 or 9 weeks] as
close as possible to mid value declination (11 degrees 43 minutes). I
choose the Northward season to take the leap week, merely because one
then does not need to use interpolation to get any of the four
declinations.

Dates are specified as days after the Northward equinox followed by
declination in (degrees:minutes) sign ignored:
31 days (11:39),  150 days (13:18), 213 days (10:07),  332 days (12:37)
32 days (12:00),  151 days (12:59), 214 days (10:29),  333 days (12:16)
33 days (12:20),  152 days (12:39), 215 days (10:50),  334 days (11:55)
34 days (12:40),  153 days (12:19), 216 days (11:12),  335 days (11:34)
35 days (13:00),  154 days (11:59), 217 days (11:33),  336 days (11:13)
36 days (13:19),  155 days (11:39), 218 days (11:54),  337 days (10:52)

One would get a better fit if one had the North season take the leap
week. The Declination figures would be the same as above except the
first column would have 364 days added and 25 minutes removed (1.25
days) by interpolation.

The figures also show that Mike's method would place the start of North
about 33.5 days after the equinox with a declination of about twelve and
a half degrees, which is what Mike got. Apply method (2) and you get
34.5 days after the equinox and method (4) also gives 34.5 days.
Applying method (3) for leap week in North gives 33+364 days (equivalent
to 31.75 days).


I now do a table for leap week in North season, interpolating as already
described:
396 days (11:35),  151 days (12:59), 214 days (10:29),  333 days (12:16)
397 days (11:55),  152 days (12:39), 215 days (10:50),  334 days (11:55)
398 days (12:15),  153 days (12:19), 216 days (11:12),  335 days (11:34)
399 days (12:35),  154 days (11:59), 217 days (11:33),  336 days (11:13)
 
Karl

10(11(20
--
Scanned by iCritical.

[Karl Palmen]

Some parts of this message have been removed. Learn more about Nabble's security policy.

Dear Yiping, Mike and Calendar People

 

Yiping said

Mike's Declination Calendar is a zero-timelag seasonal calendar, but it has unequal four seasons. If its four seasons change to equal, it'll became a world astronomical
seasonal calendar. It'll become the same proposal as mine.

I don’t think so. All Mike’s seasons begin on a Monday.

 

If we were to start each season either 2 weeks before one of Mike’s short seasons or 2 weeks after the start of one of Mike’s long seasons. We’d normally have four equal seasons of 13 weeks, each with a solstice or equinox near the centre, but sometimes a leap week would be added to one of them to keep the calendar seasons in step with the actual seasons.

 

If Mike’s calendar were to have seasons starting these days after the Northward equinox on average.

397 days (11:55),  152 days (12:39), 215 days (10:50),  334 days (11:55)

the equal seasons would begin these days after the northward equinox:

411 days, 138 days, 229 days and 320 days.

If the northward equinox were to occur on March 21^st (as it may in China) the seasons would usually begin on the nearest Monday to

6 May, 6 August, 5 November and 4 Feb.

All this assumes that the leap week occurs in the North Season.

 

This seems to be close to Yiping’s proposal but not quite the same.

 

Karl

 

10(11(20

 

PS: This implies that Mike’s seasons would usually begin on the nearest Monday to 22 April, 20 August, 22 October and 18 February.

 

From: East Carolina University Calendar discussion List [mailto:CALNDR-L@...] On Behalf Of zengyiping
Sent: 09 August 2009 13:09
To: CALNDR-L@...
Subject: Re: Declination Calendar Month Table RE: Declination calendar details without escapes

 

Dear Mike and calendar people,
Mike's Subjective Calendar is a calendar with 38 day timelag.  Obviously it is a local seasonal calendar.
Subjective calendar with any timelag is still a local seasonal calendar except its timelag equal zero.
If its timelag equal zero, its seasons become astronomical seasons. Astronomical seasons are globe or world seasons.So this
calendar becoms a astronnomical seasonal calendar.Then we can call it World Astronomical Seasonal Calendar or World Seasonal Calendar.
For convenian and neatness astronomical seasons naturally be equal(or near equal for time).So a world astronomical seasonal calendar must has four equar seasons. My
Natural World Calendar just is this calendar.
Mike's Declination Calendar is a zero-timelag seadonal calendar, but it has unequal four seasons. If its four seasons change to equal,it'll became a world astronomical
seasonal calendar.It'll become the same proposal as mine.

Yiping Zeng 9/Aug/2009

> Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 18:11:01 +0000
> From: nkklrp@...
> Subject: Re: Declination Calendar Month Table RE: Declination calendar details without escapes
> To: CALNDR-L@...
>
> Dear Yiping and Calendarists,
>
> Immediate preliminary comments on your proposal as I remember it:
>
> It is a longitude astronomical-seasonal calendar, with its four astronomical seasons being equal, as measured by distance on the ecliptic. The four astronomical seasons are centered on the equinoxes and solstices.
>
> Your centering of the astronomical seasons is like that of my declination calendar, and the difference is that you base the astronomical seasons on longitude and I base them on declination (hence the unequal lengths of my astronomical seasons, as measured in days or in longitude degrees). I recongnize that either is equally valid. I prefer declination because it's closer to the natural seasons: The sun's changes in longitude, its motion on the ecliptic, of course gives us the changing declinations, which of course give us the seasons. So I feel that a declination calendar relates more directly to the seasons.
>
> When the north solar declination passes its half-maximum point, northbound, we know that this is what is going to give us the perception of summer in the northern hemisphere, around June 1, when the terrestrial temperatures catch up.
>
> And, therefore, if you know the seasonal time-lag where you live, you can easily interpret the declination calendar as a terrestrial-seasonal calendar, by applying that lag.
>
> Mike Ossipoff
>
>
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get back to school stuff for them and cashback for you.
> http://www.bing.com/cashback?form=MSHYCB&publ=WLHMTAG&crea=TEXT_MSHYCB_BackToSchool_Cashback_BTSCashback_1x1

---

您可以借助 Windows Live 整理、编辑和 共享您的照片。

--
Scanned by iCritical.

[zengyiping]

Some parts of this message have been removed. Learn more about Nabble's security policy.

Dear Mike and calendar people,
May be that I misread your meaning and you misread my meaning too. I must explain for detail.
I think the new year's day of Gregorian calendar is a random day which has no astronomical meaning. So I say that If it move foreward 13 days ......It is only an an
assuming and has no any reason and no any person proposed.
Assumme that new year's day randomly move to Jan 14th,then Winter solstice will move to Dec 7th(new calendar date).Most people still consider that Wenter season begin
from Dec 1st(new calendar date).Timelag still is 38 days.So halve length of winter would be 38+7=45(according your definition).So the length of Wenter is 90 days.Is it
right? If there is any mistakes ,please point out to me.
If above calculating is right,It prove that your Subjective Calendar's winter's length is varing with variaty of new year's day of calendar.Since new year's day is arandom
date, so Winter's start and wenter's length are random too.A calendar is based on radom seasoms ,how can be called a scientific calendar?
(Sorry,I wrote a mistake in last post:NorthI/1 is wrong,ought be SouthI/1.)
Of course you have right to define any definition of seasons,I only point out your definition is random and has't scientific base.
You wrote that what scientific base is meaning. It is hard to answer,but I think that random thing can't be as scientific base.
I don't believe any religion including science religion. I only like asking why it is?
You wrote that any calendar in general use is a world calendar.
I reply:
This is other thing.We talk about calendar reform. A world calendar project must be based on astronomy and mustn't be based on local characters.
By the way,"The Natural World Calendar" is my calendar proposal's special name and isn't a descriptive name.

Yiping Zeng 11/Aug/2009

> Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2009 19:59:36 +0000
> From: nkklrp@...
> Subject: Re: Declination Calendar Month Table RE: Declination calendar details without escapes
> To: CALNDR-L@...
>
>
> Let me continue my reply:
>
> Yiping, you wrote:
>
> If its timelag equal zero, its seasons become astronomical seasons.
>
> I reply:
>
> Correct. Timelag is only applicable to terrestrial seasonal calendars. Astronomical seasonal calendars have no timelag.
>
>
> You continue:
>
>
> Astronomical seasons are globe or world seasons.
>
> I reply:
>
> Yes, astronomical seasons are accurate everywhere, because the sun's ecliptic longitude and declination are the same worldwide. (when defined with reference to the Earth's center)
>
> You continued:
>
> So this
> calendar becoms a astronnomical seasonal calendar.Then we can call it World Astronomical Seasonal Calendar or World Seasonal Calendar.
>
> I reply:
>
> "World Astronomical Seasonal Calendar" would have an unnecessary word, because any calendar in general use is a world calendar.
>
> Also, "astronomical seasonal" is a broad category, not a specific calendar. Astronomical seasonal calendars can be longitude or declination calendars.
>
> You continue:
>
> For convenian and neatness astronomical seasons naturally be equal(or near equal for time).So a world astronomical seasonal calendar must has four equar seasons.
>
> I reply:
>
> According to you. What you're saying is that you prefer a longitude calendar to a declination calendar. No one is criticizing your preference. I merely don't share it.
>
> You want the ecliptic divided equally, and I prefer to base the calendar on the declination. Declination is more closely related to our seasons.
>
> You continue:
>
> My
> Natural World Calendar just is this calendar.
>
> I reply:
>
> That isn't a descriptive name: Any seasonal calendar of any description can be called a natural calendar. And any calendar in general use is a "world calendar".
>
> Your proposal, as I said, is a longitude astronomical seasonal calendar.
>
> You continue:
>
> Mike's Declination Calendar is a zero-timelag seadonal calendar
>
> I reply:
>
> Correct.
>
> You continue:
>
> , but it has unequal four seasons.
>
> I reply:
>
> Correct again.
>
> You continue:
>
>
> If its four seasons change to equal,it'll became a world astronomical
> seasonal calendar.
>
> I reply:
>
> It also wouldn't be my proposal.
>
> It would then probably be intended as a longitude calendar, but that is not what I want.
>
> Mike Ossipoff
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get free photo software from Windows Live
> http://www.windowslive.com/online/photos?ocid=PID23393::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:SI_PH_software:082009

---

与任何您希望的人分享您的回忆。 任何您希望的人。

[MIKE OSSIPOFF]

 
Dear Yiping and Calendar People,
 
Yes the Gregorian New Year's day isn't astronomically relevant to us today. It may have been loosely based on a new moon in 46 B.C.
 
You continue:
 
 
So I say that If it move foreward 13 days ......
 
I reply:
 
I have no idea what you're doing there. You seem to be saying that since the Gregorian New Year is s"random", then anlything relating to Gregorian dates is random too. If that's what you're saying, then what you're saying is very flawed. No matter how the Gregorian New year or month names were chosen, it is nevertheless true that people throughout the world's temperate zones agree that northern summer and southern winter arrive with June, and that northern winter and southern summer arrive with December. With a tradition of a different New Year's day or different month names, and then it would be called something other than June and December. So what?
 
You continue:

> You wrote that what scientific base is meaning. It is hard to answer,but I think that random thing can't be as scientific base.
> I don't believe any religion including science religion. I only like asking why it is?
 
I reply:
 
It is because people throughout the temperate regions agree that northern summer and southern winter arrive with June, and that northern winter and southern summer arrive with December. And because of the typical midrange seasonal timelag of 1.25 months. That's why it is.
 

You continue:
 
This is other thing.We talk about calendar reform. A world calendar project must be based on astronomy and mustn't be based on local characters.
 
I reply:
 
Yes, that's your religious dogmatism speaking. Sure, most modern calendar proposals are related to astronomy, as are all of my calendar proposals. Yes, the widespread perception that northern summer and southern winter arrive with June, and that northern winter and southern summer arrive with December--those perceptions are not based on astronomy. That's where my calendar runs afowl of your religious doctrine.
 
You continue:

> By the way,"The Natural World Calendar" is my calendar proposal's special name and isn't a descriptive name.
 
I reply:
 
Correct.
 
I've already answered objections to Subjective Seasonal. I suggest that right now wasn't the best time to argue against Subjective Seasonal, right after I have posted a complete desription of an alternative: I posted my declination calendar expressly because many people here don't like a terrestrial seasonal calendar.
 
About the inexactitude of Subjective Seasonal: The Fahrenheit temperature scale, unlike the centigrade temperature scale, was designed for natural-environmental relevance: 0-100 covers the usual range of environmental temperatures that we experience.
 
Yes, some places can exceed 100 F. Some places never reach 100 F. Some places get below 0 F. Some places never get that low. Does that mean that the Fahrenheit 0-100 range is meaningless. No it doesn't. 100 F. is right up at the very hot end. 0 F. is a low not usually exceeded. When I lived in N.Y state, around 0 F. was the lowest that I ever read on the outdoor thermometer.
 
0 and 100 F. are pretty good approximations to our environmental temperature extremes, even though they're exceeded in some places.
 
The lesson: Usefulness, meaningfulness and value don't require an exact match.
 
It was pointed out that even our Gregorian calendar can tell us something about what to expect seasonally, when we know that from experience. Yes, and how much easier that is with a calendar that is expressly designed to represent the natural seasons.
 
You said that it "logic" requires that an astronomical-seasonal calendar have equal seasons, as measured by longitude or time. Maybe it would make sense to say that about a longitude calendar. I'm sorry, but it makes no sense to say that about a declination calendar.
 
Mike Ossipoff
 
_________________________________________________________________
Get free photo software from Windows Live
http://www.windowslive.com/online/photos?ocid=PID23393::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:SI_PH_software:082009

[zengyiping]

Some parts of this message have been removed. Learn more about Nabble's security policy.

Dear Mike , Karl and calendar people,
The June and december are month's name which represent two time pereods and not two days.people say the wenter start from December,it is not equal saying that winter
start from Dec 1st.But you just consider winter start from Dec 1st.People' saying is a rough estimate,but your calendar start winter on Dec 1st is a standard accurate
 day and consider it as a standard origin.It has been an other thing.This is what I say your Subjective Calendar's base is  not scientific.
From moving new years day forward to Jan 14th I deduce to that your winter's length is 90,not 117.It is right or wrong?If it is right,you have to think about.

karl wrote:

Mike's Declination Calendar is a zero-timelag seasonal calendar, but it has unequal four seasons. If its four seasons change to equal, it'll became a world
astronomical
seasonal calendar. It'll become the same proposal as mine.

I don’t think so. All Mike’s seasons begin on a Monday.

If we were to start each season either 2 weeks before one of Mike’s short seasons or 2 weeks after the start of one of Mike’s long seasons. We’d normally have
four equal seasons of 13 weeks, each with a solstice or equinox near the centre, but sometimes a leap week would be added to one of them to keep the calendar seasons
in step with the actual seasons.

If Mike’s calendar were to have seasons starting these days after the Northward equinox on average.

397 days (11:55),  152 days (12:39), 215 days (10:50),  334 days (11:55)

the equal seasons would begin these days after the northward equinox:

411 days, 138 days, 229 days and 320 days.

If the northward equinox were to occur on March 21st (as it may in China) the seasons would usually begin on the nearest Monday to

6 May, 6 August, 5 November and 4 Feb.

All this assumes that the leap week occurs in the North Season.

 This seems to be close to Yiping’s proposal but not quite the same.

Karl is all right My last post overlook the defferences in terms week,month and leap rule between Mike's declination calendar and my Natural World Calendar.I am sorry.
Thank karl very much.

Yiping Zeng 12/Aug/2009





 

> Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 23:56:18 +0000
> From: nkklrp@...
> Subject: Re: Declination Calendar Month Table RE: Declination calendar details without escapes
> To: CALNDR-L@...
>
>
> Dear Yiping and Calendar People,
>
> Yes the Gregorian New Year's day isn't astronomically relevant to us today. It may have been loosely based on a new moon in 46 B.C.
>
> You continue:
>
>
> So I say that If it move foreward 13 days ......
>
> I reply:
>
> I have no idea what you're doing there. You seem to be saying that since the Gregorian New Year is s"random", then anlything relating to Gregorian dates is random too. If that's what you're saying, then what you're saying is very flawed. No matter how the Gregorian New year or month names were chosen, it is nevertheless true that people throughout the world's temperate zones agree that northern summer and southern winter arrive with June, and that northern winter and southern summer arrive with December. With a tradition of a different New Year's day or different month names, and then it would be called something other than June and December. So what?
>
> You continue:
>
> > You wrote that what scientific base is meaning. It is hard to answer,but I think that random thing can't be as scientific base.
> > I don't believe any religion including science religion. I only like asking why it is?
>
> I reply:
>
> It is because people throughout the temperate regions agree that northern summer and southern winter arrive with June, and that northern winter and southern summer arrive with December. And because of the typical midrange seasonal timelag of 1.25 months. That's why it is.
>
>
> You continue:
>
> This is other thing.We talk about calendar reform. A world calendar project must be based on astronomy and mustn't be based on local characters.
>
> I reply:
>
> Yes, that's your religious dogmatism speaking. Sure, most modern calendar proposals are related to astronomy, as are all of my calendar proposals. Yes, the widespread perception that northern summer and southern winter arrive with June, and that northern winter and southern summer arrive with December--those perceptions are not based on astronomy. That's where my calendar runs afowl of your religious doctrine.
>
> You continue:
>
> > By the way,"The Natural World Calendar" is my calendar proposal's special name and isn't a descriptive name.
>
> I reply:
>
> Correct.
>
> I've already answered objections to Subjective Seasonal. I suggest that right now wasn't the best time to argue against Subjective Seasonal, right after I have posted a complete desription of an alternative: I posted my declination calendar expressly because many people here don't like a terrestrial seasonal calendar.
>
> About the inexactitude of Subjective Seasonal: The Fahrenheit temperature scale, unlike the centigrade temperature scale, was designed for natural-environmental relevance: 0-100 covers the usual range of environmental temperatures that we experience.
>
> Yes, some places can exceed 100 F. Some places never reach 100 F. Some places get below 0 F. Some places never get that low. Does that mean that the Fahrenheit 0-100 range is meaningless. No it doesn't. 100 F. is right up at the very hot end. 0 F. is a low not usually exceeded. When I lived in N.Y state, around 0 F. was the lowest that I ever read on the outdoor thermometer.
>
> 0 and 100 F. are pretty good approximations to our environmental temperature extremes, even though they're exceeded in some places.
>
> The lesson: Usefulness, meaningfulness and value don't require an exact match.
>
> It was pointed out that even our Gregorian calendar can tell us something about what to expect seasonally, when we know that from experience. Yes, and how much easier that is with a calendar that is expressly designed to represent the natural seasons.
>
> You said that it "logic" requires that an astronomical-seasonal calendar have equal seasons, as measured by longitude or time. Maybe it would make sense to say that about a longitude calendar. I'm sorry, but it makes no sense to say that about a declination calendar.
>
> Mike Ossipoff
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get free photo software from Windows Live
> http://www.windowslive.com/online/photos?ocid=PID23393::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:SI_PH_software:082009

---

聊天+搜索+邮箱 想要轻松出游,手机MSN帮你搞定! 立刻下载！

[MIKE OSSIPOFF]

Dear Yiping,
 
You wrote:

The June and december are month's name which represent two time pereods and not two days.people say the wenter start from December,it is not equal saying that winter
start from Dec 1st.
 
I reply:
 
Saying that winter arrives with December is saying that, at least more or less, winter starts when December starts. When Leigh Hunt, the 18th century British writer (along with other writers too), said that June is full summer, he was referring to the month of June. That month starts on June 1. Neither Leigh Hunt, nor others throughout the temperate zone, think that, suddenly and abruptly, summer (or southern hemisphere winter) starts on June 1. But they do say that summer (or southern winter) arrives with June. They know it isn't exact at that day, or at 12 midnight on that day.
 
 
But you just consider winter start from Dec 1st.People' saying is a rough estimate,but your calendar start winter on Dec 1st is a standard accurate
 day and consider it as a standard origin.
 
I reply:
 
Actually you're wrong there. In its fixed version, Subjective Seasonal's North doen't always start on June 1 Gregorian, though it is centered on that Gregorian date. In the fixed version it always starts on June 1.
 
You wrote:
 
It has been an other thing.This is what I say your Subjective Calendar's base is  not scientific.
 
I reply:
 
The widespread feeling that northern summer and southern winter arrive with June, and that northern winter and southern summer arrive with December may not be "scientific", but it's nevertheless widespread. Terrestrial seasons don't precisely abide by the calendar--sorry if they aren't scientific enough for you :-)
 
But when you try to apply science beyond its legitimate range of application, then you're a practitioner of pseudo-science.
 
You continued:

From moving new years day forward to Jan 14th I deduce to that your winter's length is 90,not 117.It is right or wrong?
 
I reply:
 
It is wrong. Subjective Seasonal's North and South seasonal divisions are 119 days, in the fixed version, and 117 or 118 days in the various nonfixed versions.
 
But I dare say that if you move things around enough, you can change any calendar to have year-divisions of whatever length you want it to have :-)
 
By the way, in your last quoted sentence above, I still have no idea what you're talking about. The length of my calendars' seasons is in no way affected by where you move Gregorian New Year to.
 
You continued:
 
If it is right,you have to think about.
 
I reply:
 
You need to think about what you mean by "From moving new year's day forward to Jan 14th I deduce that your winter's length is 90, not 117." Think about whether you know what that means, and whether you're sure that it means anything. If it means something, and if you know what it means, then maybe you can more carefully say what it means.

Yiping had said:

Mike's Declination Calendar is a zero-timelag seasonal calendar, but it has unequal four seasons. If its four seasons change to equal, it'll became a world
astronomical
seasonal calendar. It'll become the same proposal as mine.
 
I reply:
 
If you sufficiently change anything, it will be the same as anything you want it to be the same as. Before changes, however, there is little similarity between those 2 calendars. They're both astronomical seasonal calendars. They both center their major year divisions on equinoxes and solstices. Beyond that there is no similarity. You propose a longitude calendar, and I propose a declination calendar. Big difference.

Karl had replied:

I don’t think so. All Mike’s seasons begin on a Monday.

Yiping replied:

If we were to start each season either 2 weeks before one of Mike’s short seasons or 2 weeks after the start of one of Mike’s long seasons. We’d normally have
four equal seasons of 13 weeks
 
I reply:
 
Yes, and "If wishes were horses..."
 
If we were to start each season 2 weeks before or after my calendar does, then we wouldn't any longer be able to call it my calendar, would we.

Mike Ossipoff
 
_________________________________________________________________
Get your vacation photos on your phone!
http://windowsliveformobile.com/en-us/photos/default.aspx?&OCID=0809TL-HM

[MIKE OSSIPOFF]

Dear Yiping,
 
You wrote:

The June and december are month's name which represent two time pereods and not two days.people say the wenter start from December,it is not equal saying that winter
start from Dec 1st.
 
I reply:
 
Saying that winter arrives with December is saying that, at least more or less, winter starts when December starts. When Leigh Hunt, the 18th century British writer (along with other writers too), said that June is full summer, he was referring to the month of June. That month starts on June 1. Neither Leigh Hunt, nor others throughout the temperate zone, think that, suddenly and abruptly, summer (or southern hemisphere winter) starts on June 1. But they do say that summer (or southern winter) arrives with June. They know it isn't exact at that day, or at 12 midnight on that day.
 
 
But you just consider winter start from Dec 1st.People' saying is a rough estimate,but your calendar start winter on Dec 1st is a standard accurate
 day and consider it as a standard origin.
 
I reply:
 
Actually you're wrong there. In its fixed version, Subjective Seasonal's North doen't always start on June 1 Gregorian, though it is centered on that Gregorian date. In the fixed version it always starts on June 1.
 
You wrote:
 
It has been an other thing.This is what I say your Subjective Calendar's base is  not scientific.
 
I reply:
 
The widespread feeling that northern summer and southern winter arrive with June, and that northern winter and southern summer arrive with December may not be "scientific", but it's nevertheless widespread. Terrestrial seasons don't precisely abide by the calendar--sorry if they aren't scientific enough for you :-)
 
But when you try to apply science beyond its legitimate range of application, then you're a practitioner of pseudo-science.
 
You continued:

From moving new years day forward to Jan 14th I deduce to that your winter's length is 90,not 117.It is right or wrong?
 
I reply:
 
It is wrong. Subjective Seasonal's North and South seasonal divisions are 119 days, in the fixed version, and 117 or 118 days in the various nonfixed versions.
 
But I dare say that if you move things around enough, you can change any calendar to have year-divisions of whatever length you want it to have :-)
 
By the way, in your last quoted sentence above, I still have no idea what you're talking about. The length of my calendars' seasons is in no way affected by where you move Gregorian New Year to.
 
You continued:
 
If it is right,you have to think about.
 
I reply:
 
You need to think about what you mean by "From moving new year's day forward to Jan 14th I deduce that your winter's length is 90, not 117." Think about whether you know what that means, and whether you're sure that it means anything. If it means something, and if you know what it means, then maybe you can more carefully say what it means.

Yiping had said:

Mike's Declination Calendar is a zero-timelag seasonal calendar, but it has unequal four seasons. If its four seasons change to equal, it'll became a world
astronomical
seasonal calendar. It'll become the same proposal as mine.
 
I reply:
 
If you sufficiently change anything, it will be the same as anything you want it to be the same as. Before changes, however, there is little similarity between those 2 calendars. They're both astronomical seasonal calendars. They both center their major year divisions on equinoxes and solstices. Beyond that there is no similarity. You propose a longitude calendar, and I propose a declination calendar. Big difference.

Karl had replied:

I don’t think so. All Mike’s seasons begin on a Monday.

Yiping replied:

If we were to start each season either 2 weeks before one of Mike’s short seasons or 2 weeks after the start of one of Mike’s long seasons. We’d normally have
four equal seasons of 13 weeks
 
I reply:
 
Yes, and "If wishes were horses..."
 
If we were to start each season 2 weeks before or after my calendar does, then we wouldn't any longer be able to call it my calendar, would we.

Mike Ossipoff
 
_________________________________________________________________
Get free photo software from Windows Live
http://www.windowslive.com/online/photos?ocid=PID23393::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:SI_PH_software:082009

[zengyiping]

Some parts of this message have been removed. Learn more about Nabble's security policy.

Dear Mike and calendar people,

Don't loss your temper and put a label on your discussing opponent.Putting a jalel on opponent isn't debatting.

Ok,I ask you:how you got your winter length 117 days or 118 days or 119 days ?Write your detailed steps.May be you have sufficient reason.

Yiping Zeng 13/Aug/2009

> Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 23:54:49 +0000
> From: nkklrp@...
> Subject: Re: Declination Calendar Month Table RE: Declination calendar details without escapes
> To: CALNDR-L@...
>
> Dear Yiping,
>
> You wrote:
>
> The June and december are month's name which represent two time pereods and not two days.people say the wenter start from December,it is not equal saying that winter
> start from Dec 1st.
>
> I reply:
>
> Saying that winter arrives with December is saying that, at least more or less, winter starts when December starts. When Leigh Hunt, the 18th century British writer (along with other writers too), said that June is full summer, he was referring to the month of June. That month starts on June 1. Neither Leigh Hunt, nor others throughout the temperate zone, think that, suddenly and abruptly, summer (or southern hemisphere winter) starts on June 1. But they do say that summer (or southern winter) arrives with June. They know it isn't exact at that day, or at 12 midnight on that day.
>
>
> But you just consider winter start from Dec 1st.People' saying is a rough estimate,but your calendar start winter on Dec 1st is a standard accurate
> day and consider it as a standard origin.
>
> I reply:
>
> Actually you're wrong there. In its fixed version, Subjective Seasonal's North doen't always start on June 1 Gregorian, though it is centered on that Gregorian date. In the fixed version it always starts on June 1.
>
> You wrote:
>
> It has been an other thing.This is what I say your Subjective Calendar's base is not scientific.
>
> I reply:
>
> The widespread feeling that northern summer and southern winter arrive with June, and that northern winter and southern summer arrive with December may not be "scientific", but it's nevertheless widespread. Terrestrial seasons don't precisely abide by the calendar--sorry if they aren't scientific enough for you :-)
>
> But when you try to apply science beyond its legitimate range of application, then you're a practitioner of pseudo-science.
>
> You continued:
>
> From moving new years day forward to Jan 14th I deduce to that your winter's length is 90,not 117.It is right or wrong?
>
> I reply:
>
> It is wrong. Subjective Seasonal's North and South seasonal divisions are 119 days, in the fixed version, and 117 or 118 days in the various nonfixed versions.
>
> But I dare say that if you move things around enough, you can change any calendar to have year-divisions of whatever length you want it to have :-)
>
> By the way, in your last quoted sentence above, I still have no idea what you're talking about. The length of my calendars' seasons is in no way affected by where you move Gregorian New Year to.
>
> You continued:
>
> If it is right,you have to think about.
>
> I reply:
>
> You need to think about what you mean by "From moving new year's day forward to Jan 14th I deduce that your winter's length is 90, not 117." Think about whether you know what that means, and whether you're sure that it means anything. If it means something, and if you know what it means, then maybe you can more carefully say what it means.
>
> Yiping had said:
>
> Mike's Declination Calendar is a zero-timelag seasonal calendar, but it has unequal four seasons. If its four seasons change to equal, it'll became a world
> astronomical
> seasonal calendar. It'll become the same proposal as mine.
>
> I reply:
>
> If you sufficiently change anything, it will be the same as anything you want it to be the same as. Before changes, however, there is little similarity between those 2 calendars. They're both astronomical seasonal calendars. They both center their major year divisions on equinoxes and solstices. Beyond that there is no similarity. You propose a longitude calendar, and I propose a declination calendar. Big difference.
>
> Karl had replied:
>
> I don’t think so. All Mike’s seasons begin on a Monday.
>
> Yiping replied:
>
> If we were to start each season either 2 weeks before one of Mike’s short seasons or 2 weeks after the start of one of Mike’s long seasons. We’d normally have
> four equal seasons of 13 weeks
>
> I reply:
>
> Yes, and "If wishes were horses..."
>
> If we were to start each season 2 weeks before or after my calendar does, then we wouldn't any longer be able to call it my calendar, would we.
>
> Mike Ossipoff
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get free photo software from Windows Live
> http://www.windowslive.com/online/photos?ocid=PID23393::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:SI_PH_software:082009

---

您可以借助 Windows Live 整理、编辑和 共享您的照片。