Live data from Hacker News

Metric Time

metric-time.com

191–200 of 343 posts

Re: Metric Time

#191
> A metric minute is broken into 100 seconds.

> A standard minute has 60 seconds. There are 2.4 standard minutes in 1 metric minute.

Surely it should be 1.(6). I hope they didn’t change the definition of a second. It’s an SI unit.

Re: Metric Time

#192
post #22

I'm really fascinated by such ideas. However, it's just academic as time is so much baked into physical devices (watches, clocks, ...) so this will most probably never happen. I'd rather start redoing the calendar. It doesn't need to be metric but the different lengths of the months (and the naming Oct. should be 8 not 10?) could be reworked.

Have you seen this unix time clock? https://retr0.id/stuff/2038/

Re: Metric Time

#193
post #109

.beat time or Swatch Internet Time is way better. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swatch_Internet_Time

No, it's not. Dividing one day into just 1000 units is way less precise unless one uses decimals, in which case it's just plain inconvenient.

[deleted]

Re: Metric Time

#194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there a quarter day at the end of the year?

No because its a humane rather than scientific system. Day lengths in a scientific time vary, but in this system the hours are defined to be 10ths of a solar day so they vary as the day varies. Scientific measurement should be done with a different system. I'd suggest something based on the speed of light.

intercalation took millennia to get right and was driven largely by starvation due to crop failure.

Re: Metric Time

#195

.beat time or Swatch Internet Time is way better. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swatch_Internet_Time

Making it oriented on UTC+0100 is dumb

They used CET as a reference, the local timezone of the Swatch headquarters.

Re: Metric Time

#196
post #109

.beat time or Swatch Internet Time is way better. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swatch_Internet_Time

No, it's not. Dividing one day into just 1000 units is way less precise unless one uses decimals, in which case it's just plain inconvenient.

"way less precise" ? There are only 1440 minutes in a day, so a beat is 1 minute and 26.4 seconds, precise enough. And then, if you you want more precision, like we use seconds for minutes, you can divide a beat by 100 (@500.12), not less inconvenient than using seconds.

Re: Metric Time

#197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While in theory you could measure sleeping time in fractions of 2 pi, I'd guess that you're using rational numbers in the actual calculation anyways.

Why would sleeping time be a fraction of 2pi? > I'd guess that you're using rational numbers in the actual calculation anyways. Well, actually one uses floating point arithmetic, which isn't rational numbers either (as shown by the classic example a = 1/3, b = 3*a, then b != a)

> Why would sleeping time be a fraction of 2pi?

The rotation of a hand of the clock, expressed as the arc length of the curve of its endpoint :)

A sleeping time of 0 is always a problem, though.

Re: Metric Time

#198
Base 10 is a step backwards. 12 & 60 give you lots of useful rational fractions.

Leave metric time (c = 1m) to Minkowski space.

Re: Metric Time

#200

> A metric minute is broken into 100 seconds. > A standard minute has 60 seconds. There are 2.4 standard minutes in 1 metric minute. Surely it should be 1.(6). I hope they didn’t change the definition of a second. It’s an SI unit.

> It’s an SI unit.

There is really nothing scientific about time as we mortals use it.

As soon as you bind the definition of time to the rotation of the earth, all bets are off about being "scientific".

A day has x hours. An hour has y minutes. A minute has z seconds.

Therefore, you have now defined a second as 1 / (x times y times z) What happens when the earth speeds up by a fraction of a second? Does the definition of a second change?

Post reply on HN