Wikipedia Said It Couldn't be Done!

And they were right! But I came closer than anyone might think was
possible...

I happened to be looking at the Wikipedia page on calendar reform
earlier today.

It came up in a Google search - I wanted to find out if it was true that
the 13-month (of 28 days) fiscal year that I've seen mentioned in some
references is not used any longer by businesses.

It listed the various objectives of calendar reform, and noted that they
couldn't all be achieved at the same time.

This didn't surprise me. Because while I could see modifying the World
Calendar by having only 364 days in regular years - and adding a whole
week in leap years - as a way to satisfy those concerned about going to
church on a REAL Sunday and therefore to meet *almost all* of the goals
of calendar reform...

in the list of objectives of calendar reform, one of the "problems" with
the calendar that needed correcting was the fact that months didn't
correspond to real *lunar* months! So you couldn't say that the 1st of
the month is always at or near New Moon, and the 15th of the month is
always at or near Full Moon.

Given the complexities of the Metonic cycle and all that, of course that
couldn't be done and yet leave a calendar uniform!

Well, thinking about it, I saw a way to get *close*.

If a pure solar calendar can be synchronized with the week, to make the
months look the same, then one could take a pure lunar calendar, and
synchronize it with the week too.

Doing that, you get a calendar of 14 months, in length
30,29,30,29,30,29... and, since the 59-day two month period is repeated
seven times, you get a calendar with a lunar month of 29.5 days, and it
always starts on the same day of the week.

The lunar month is 29.53 days, though. But if you take the same
calendar, and just use the first 9 months of it, you get a calendar with
an average month of 29.56 days, so you just alternate 14-month periods
with 9 month periods.

And then, under your little 14-month perpetual calendar, you have a
table which relates the *real* years, alternating between 12 and 13
months according to the Metonic cycle, to the months on your calendar!

http://www.quadibloc.com/science/cal03.htm

.... the section on the bottom of the page.

John Savard
http://www.quadibloc.com/index.html

On Sep 27, 8:06 pm, (John Savard)
wrote:
And they were right! But I came closer than anyone might think was
possible...

I happened to be looking at the Wikipedia page on calendar reform
earlier today.

It came up in a Google search - I wanted to find out if it was true that
the 13-month (of 28 days) fiscal year that I've seen mentioned in some
references is not used any longer by businesses.

It listed the various objectives of calendar reform, and noted that they
couldn't all be achieved at the same time.

This didn't surprise me. Because while I could see modifying the World
Calendar by having only 364 days in regular years - and adding a whole
week in leap years - as a way to satisfy those concerned about going to
church on a REAL Sunday and therefore to meet *almost all* of the goals
of calendar reform...

in the list of objectives of calendar reform, one of the "problems" with
the calendar that needed correcting was the fact that months didn't
correspond to real *lunar* months! So you couldn't say that the 1st of
the month is always at or near New Moon, and the 15th of the month is
always at or near Full Moon.

Given the complexities of the Metonic cycle and all that, of course that
couldn't be done and yet leave a calendar uniform!

Well, thinking about it, I saw a way to get *close*.

If a pure solar calendar can be synchronized with the week, to make the
months look the same, then one could take a pure lunar calendar, and
synchronize it with the week too.

Doing that, you get a calendar of 14 months, in length
30,29,30,29,30,29... and, since the 59-day two month period is repeated
seven times, you get a calendar with a lunar month of 29.5 days, and it
always starts on the same day of the week.

The lunar month is 29.53 days, though. But if you take the same
calendar, and just use the first 9 months of it, you get a calendar with
an average month of 29.56 days, so you just alternate 14-month periods
with 9 month periods.

And then, under your little 14-month perpetual calendar, you have a
table which relates the *real* years, alternating between 12 and 13
months according to the Metonic cycle, to the months on your calendar!

http://www.quadibloc.com/science/cal03.htm

... the section on the bottom of the page.

John Savardhttp://www.quadibloc.com/index.html

Nice effort. However I am not sure the business world would care
to have its calendar software rendered inaccurate after the change.

With the moon gradually lengthening its orbit and period, in a few
million years, it should nicely fit a period of 30 days, or eventually
some longer period that conveniently meshes with a solar calendar.

Cheers,
Larry G.

Nice effort. However I am not sure the business world would care
to have its calendar software rendered inaccurate after the change.

With the moon gradually lengthening its orbit and period, in a few
million years, it should nicely fit a period of 30 days, or eventually
some longer period that conveniently meshes with a solar calendar.


OTOH, total eclipses will be less interesting.

"Peter Webb" wrote

Nice effort. However I am not sure the business world would care
to have its calendar software rendered inaccurate after the change.

With the moon gradually lengthening its orbit and period, in a few
million years, it should nicely fit a period of 30 days, or eventually
some longer period that conveniently meshes with a solar calendar.


OTOH, total eclipses will be less interesting.

Yes, especially since by then the moon be too far away to completely cover
the sun.