Unix Time and a Modest Proposal
11–20 of 43 posts
Re: Unix Time and a Modest Proposal
#12Re: Unix Time and a Modest Proposal
#13Re: Unix Time and a Modest Proposal
#14The ratio is around 365.2422. Calling it 365 is too crude. Julius Caesar said we should call it 365 1/4, and that was good enough for a while. This is blowing my mind that thousands of years ago they were able to measure the orbits to this level of accuracy.
Re: Unix Time and a Modest Proposal
#15Re: Unix Time and a Modest Proposal
#16The ratio is around 365.2422. Calling it 365 is too crude. Julius Caesar said we should call it 365 1/4, and that was good enough for a while. This is blowing my mind that thousands of years ago they were able to measure the orbits to this level of accuracy.
Re: Unix Time and a Modest Proposal
#17Re: Unix Time and a Modest Proposal
#18The ratio is around 365.2422. Calling it 365 is too crude. Julius Caesar said we should call it 365 1/4, and that was good enough for a while. This is blowing my mind that thousands of years ago they were able to measure the orbits to this level of accuracy.
Re: Unix Time and a Modest Proposal
#19If you have problem with Unix time you are probably using it wrong. It is monotonically rising timer that increments every second. That's it. It doesn't care about leap second, leap years or any of the orbits.
If you think you have no problems with unix time, it's because you never noticed them.
TAI is what you want.
Re: Unix Time and a Modest Proposal
#20The ratio is around 365.2422. Calling it 365 is too crude. Julius Caesar said we should call it 365 1/4, and that was good enough for a while. This is blowing my mind that thousands of years ago they were able to measure the orbits to this level of accuracy.