It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People
originally posted by: neutrinostargate
originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People
"Russian President Vladimir Putin attends an Orthodox Christmas service at a local cathedral of the village Otradnoye in Voronezh region Jan. 7, 2015. Most Orthodox Christians celebrate Christmas according to the Julian calendar on Jan. 7, two weeks after most western Christian churches that abide by the Gregorian calendar. Photo: Reuters/Alexei Druzhinin/RIA Novosti/Kremlin "
So is that wrong above? LOL You are saying Jan. 7th should be the Gregorian date. Well guess what? They don't follow the freaking Gregorian calendar, they follow the Julian. Jan. 7th is the Julian date not the Gregorian. If they followed the Gregorian, which they don't, then sure, they would follow Jan. 7th as the Gregorian date.
The wording used in that paragraph is ambiguous. Let me re-write it in a way that is more clear:
"Russian President Vladimir Putin attends an Orthodox Christmas service at a local cathedral of the village Otradnoye in Voronezh region Jan. 7, 2015. Most Orthodox Christians celebrate Christmas according to the Julian calendar, which falls on Jan. 7 on the Gregorian Calendar, two weeks after most western Christian churches that abide by the Gregorian calendar...."
You are again running into semantics.
"Fixed Feasts Holidays celebrated on specific days each year are known as "fixed feasts" and include Christmas, New Year's and All Saints Day. In Roman Catholicism, Christmas is on December 25th every year, New Year's Day is always on January 1st, and All Saints Day is always on November 1st. In Orthodox churches, fixed feasts in the Julian calendar occur 13 days later than the Gregorian calendar's fixed feasts. For example, Christmas is celebrated on January 7th."
originally posted by: neutrinostargate
Not semantics. It is fact. The Julian is always ahead of the Gregorian. That is a fact! Every 133.33 years the Julian calendar becomes 1 day longer from the Gregorian, and not behind the Gregorian. That is fact!
Again, if the Russian Orthodox followed the Julian calendar, then there is no point to celebrate Christmas on Jan. 7th Gregorian because essentially they are superseding the Gregorian calendar over the Julian. They must supersede the Julian over the Gregorian if they follow it, so Jan. 7th Julian would be Dec. 25th Gregorian.
"The Gregorian calendar, also called the Western calendar and the Christian calendar, is internationally the most widely used civil calendar.[1][2][3] It is named for Pope Gregory XIII, who introduced it in 1582. The calendar was a refinement to the Julian calendar[4] amounting to a 0.002% correction in the length of the year. The motivation for the reform was to bring the date for the celebration of Easter to the time of the year in which it was celebrated when it was introduced by the early Church. The Gregorian reform modified the Julian calendar's scheme of leap years as follows: Every year that is exactly divisible by four is a leap year, except for years that are exactly divisible by 100, but these centurial years are leap years if they are exactly divisible by 400. For example, the years 1700, 1800, and 1900 are not leap years, but the year 2000 is. In addition to the change in the mean length of the calendar year from 365.25 days (365 days 6 hours) to 365.2425 days (365 days 5 hours 49 minutes 12 seconds), a reduction of 10 minutes 48 seconds per year”
originally posted by: neutrinostargate
People think the Gregorian calendar is now ahead of the Julian calendar by 13 days.
Is that the case though?
It seems like the Julian calendar always drifts ahead of the Gregorian calendar, which means the Gregorian calendar is never ahead of the Julian in regards to days.
Currently, Feb. 26th, 2016 (Gregorian) is Feb 13th, 2016. Well that is what they say.
I believe it actually should be Feb. 26th, 2016 (Julian) and Feb. 13th, 2016 (Gregorian).
We can see in this LA Times article that Feb. 25th, 2016 is July 11th, 2017 if you take away leap years.
This LA TIMES article states that Feb. 25th, 2016 would be July 11th, 2016 if you don't count leap years and if you started on 46 B.C.
graphics.latimes.com...
How do you get to July 11th, 2016?
1/(365.2425 - 365) = 4.123 leap years for Gregorian calendar
and
1/(365.25 - 365) = 4 leap years for Julian calendar
2016 plus 46 BC = 2062 years total
2062 years/4.123 years (Gregorian leap years avg.) = 500 days but this is a leap year so it would be 501 days
2062 years/4 years (Julian leap years) = 516 days
Feb. 25th, 2016 plus 501 days = July 10th/11th, 2016 (Gregorian)
or
Feb 25th, 2016 plus 516 days = July 26th, 2016 (Julian).
So it seems that the Julian is always ahead of the Gregorian and not behind it.
" In the Julian calendar, named after Julius Caesar, every fourth year had 366 days rather than 365. Roman astronomers calculated that a year — the time it takes the Earth to revolve around the sun —had a duration of 365.25 days. This method of adding a “leap day” every fourth year averaged out to this determined value.
Except, a year’s length isn’t 365.25 days; it’s actually a bit shorter. This only became noticeable as the centuries passed and the calendar drifted out of sync with the seasons. By the 16th century A.D., people noticed that the first day of spring had drifted 10 days ahead of the intended 20th of March. Basically, history had used a leap-day year 10 more times than was useful.
Recognizing the 10-day error, Pope Gregory XIII had a scholar (Aloysius Liliusa) devise a new system that would keep the calendar in sync with the seasons. This new system changed which years should be considered leap years based on what numbers divide the years evenly. -Aloysius devised a system in which every fourth year was a leap year; however, century years that were divisible 400 were exempted. So, for example, the years 2000 and 1600 were leap years, but not 1900, 1800 or 1700.
While in a 2000-year period, the Julian calendar had 500 leap years; the Gregorian calendar only has 485. This change was based on a calculation that an average year length is 365.2425 days, which was pretty close: the modern measured value is 365.24219 days"
-"At the time of Gregory's reform there had already been a drift of 10 days since the Council of Nicaea, resulting in the vernal equinox falling on 10 or 11 March instead of the ecclesiastically fixed date of 21 March, and if unreformed it would drift further. Lilius proposed that the 10-day drift should be corrected by deleting the Julian leap day on each of its ten occurrences over a period of forty years, thereby providing for a gradual return of the equinox to 21 March.
The second component consisted of an approximation which would provide an accurate yet simple, rule-based calendar. Lilius's formula was a 10-day correction to revert the drift since the Council of Nicaea, and the imposition of a leap day in only 97 years in 400 rather than in 1 year in 4. The proposed rule was that years divisible by 100 would be leap years only if they were divisible by 400 as well.
The 19-year cycle used for the lunar calendar was also to be corrected by one day every 300 or 400 years (8 times in 2500 years) along with corrections for the years that are no longer leap years (i.e., 1700, 1800, 1900, 2100, etc.). In fact, a new method for computing the date of Easter was introduced.
When the new calendar was put in use, the error accumulated in the 13 centuries since the Council of Nicaea was corrected by a deletion of 10 days. The Julian calendar day Thursday, 4 October 1582 was followed by the first day of the Gregorian calendar, Friday, 15 October 1582 "
originally posted by: DISRAELI
a reply to: [post=20419977]
You need to do what we have all suggested many times before. Forget all the calculations you are devising to confuse yourself, and take some time to think through the mechanics.
Julian is an athlete running down a 100 yard track, Gregorian is an athlete running down a 90 yard track.
Since they are running at the same speed, Gregorian is going to reach the end of his track first, over and over again.
That's how he gets ahead.
originally posted by: neutrinostargate
You can see above, it is incorrect, the 10 day Julian drift wasn't making the equinox at March 11th but instead at March 30th, which I have shown.
originally posted by: DISRAELI
a reply to: neutrinostargate
Where you are going wrong is trying to track these calendars back to beginning of the Mayan cycle.
There is NO SUCH THING as a "Gregorian date" for 3114 B.C., because the Gregorian calendar did not then exist.
The starting-point of the Julian calendar is obviously the time of Julius Caesar.
The Gregorian calendar has the same notional starting-point, because Gregory's purpose was to get the spring equinox back on the date where Julius placed it.
Before then, the only way to get an accurate date in our terms is to regard the spring equinox as the equivalent of March 21st.
Projecting either calendar back before Julius Caesar is a meaningless and unnecessary exercise, and it's the source of all your puzzlement.
You need to do what we have all suggested many times before. Forget all the calculations you are devising to confuse yourself, and take some time to think through the mechanics.
Julian is an athlete running down a 100 yard track, Gregorian is an athlete running down a 90 yard track.
Since they are running at the same speed, Gregorian is going to reach the end of his track first, over and over again.
That's how he gets ahead.
originally posted by: neutrinostargate
originally posted by: DISRAELI
Julian is an athlete running down a 100 yard track, Gregorian is an athlete running down the same 100 yard track. But the Gregorian athlete is running slower because it is 10.8 minutes slower per year then the Julian. The Julian is faster, thus, the Julian is going to reach the end of the 100 yard track faster then the Gregorian over and over again. That is how the Julian gets ahead of the Gregorian.
originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People
originally posted by: neutrinostargate
originally posted by: DISRAELI
Julian is an athlete running down a 100 yard track, Gregorian is an athlete running down the same 100 yard track. But the Gregorian athlete is running slower because it is 10.8 minutes slower per year then the Julian. The Julian is faster, thus, the Julian is going to reach the end of the 100 yard track faster then the Gregorian over and over again. That is how the Julian gets ahead of the Gregorian.
The Gregorian year is 10.8 minutes shorter per year, not 10.8 minutes slower. There's a major difference between "shorter" and "slower".
A year that is shorter actually passes more quickly; a year that is longer passes more slowly.
A Gregorian runner who takes 356.2425 days to cross the finish line will do so 10.8 minutes ahead of the Julian runner, who takes 365.25 days to do so. The Gregorian runs the same distance as the Julian, but the Gregorian takes a shorter amount of time to do so.
A person who runs a mile in 3:57 will beat a runner who runs a mile in 4:00.
originally posted by: neutrinostargate
So if that is the case, why are people and so many articles then state August 11th, 3114 BC if the Gregorian is irrelevant then? Just a thought.
Julian is an athlete running down a 100 yard track, Gregorian is an athlete running down the same 100 yard track. But the Gregorian athlete is running slower because it is 10.8 minutes slower per year then the Julian.
originally posted by: DISRAELI
originally posted by: neutrinostargate
So if that is the case, why are people and so many articles then state August 11th, 3114 BC if the Gregorian is irrelevant then? Just a thought.
That one is easy. They do it because they are obsessed with the Mayan cycle, and they miss the point that both our European calendars effectively begin with Julius Caesar.
Julian is an athlete running down a 100 yard track, Gregorian is an athlete running down the same 100 yard track. But the Gregorian athlete is running slower because it is 10.8 minutes slower per year then the Julian.
We are gradually getting there, not far to go.
"Running at the same speed down different lengths of track" fits the situation better.
Each calendar takes 24 hours to pass from one day to the next; that is "running at the same speed".
But in some years, the Julian runner has to complete 366 days, while the Gregorian runner only has to complete 365 days. That is "being on a shorter track".
Perhaps we can visualise the race as a circuit race, in which the two runners are running at exactly the same speed, but the Gregorian runner is occasionally allowed to take a short-cut while the Julian runner has to go all the way round the bend.
Can you see that the runner who is allowed to take short-cuts will gradually move ahead?
Alternatively, we can have another look at my explanation showing how the effect works itself out through the year;
If the two calendars start on the same date, in a year which is a leap year only on the Julian system, then;
Julian January 1st = Gregorian January 1st
Julian February 28th = Gregorian February 28th
Julian February 29th = Gregorian March 1st
Julian December 30th = Gregorian December 31st
Julian December 31st = Gregorian January 1st (following year)
Read that through and reflect on what happens if that effect repeats every couple of centuries, until we arrive at the present situation of;
Julian December 25th = Gregorian January 7th
Juilan February 14th (today's date) = Gregorian February 27th (today's date)
originally posted by: AndyMayhew
The number of days in a year (determined by one revolution of the Earth around the Sun) does not change regardless of what calendar (and human artifact) you use. The solstices and equinoxes occur exactlty that same time regardless.
But if you choose to have a calendar with 200, or 350 or 380 days, then of course that calandar will not match with the real world. And our current calendar of 365.25 days (appox) does its best to match with the real world.
Gotcha, makes sense now. Thanks.
We must not allow the clock and the calendar to blind us to the fact that each moment of life is a miracle and a mystery.