Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Our measurement of Time is wrong?

page: 1
17
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 16 2013 @ 06:37 PM
link   
I thought about this a day before christmas of 2012 and I have wanted to post it for quite some time.

Having discussed the measurement of time with a couple of friends, I came to the conclusion, that we aren't actually in 2012 (at the time), now being not in 2013...
The reason for this is our time scale is wrong.
We measure days in 24 hours, years in 365 days... Discounting of course our Leap Years that are supposed to make up the difference (which they do not).
Undisputed, check your watch or time piece


However, according to Earth, it takes 23hrs, 56mins and 4 seconds to complete a single turn, which gives us a time discrepancy of 236 seconds or 3 minutes and 56 seconds.
And it takes 365.256363004 days to make one complete 360° orbit of our Sun.

My initial thought was how do our watches keep pace and how do we not go out of sync with the planet?
IE if we are over counting by nearly 4 minutes, over the span of a month, Noon would actually be only around 10am... compounding as time went on... yet it doesn't?
I wonder if watches are made with this discrepancy in mind and automatically compensates?

Anyway, I decided to run the numbers on how many seconds, minutes, hours, days and years have actually passed since Year 0.
This is what it came to;
687,061 ACTUAL days VS 735,261 counted by our inferior measurement...
So instead of it actually being 2013, we are actually in the year 1881.

Quite an amusing number and quite a large discrepancy no?

Just for giggles... I ran my age through the calculator and instead of being 31, I am actually 29 Earth Years.

Now I know a lot of people hate it when Wiki is referenced... but in this context, I am sure it will be acceptable

Reference: en.wikipedia.org...

How could we have got it so wrong?
Oh I know how... Convenience of the 24 hour cycle to make everything neat and tidy...




posted on Jan, 16 2013 @ 06:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sovaka
However, according to Earth, it takes 23hrs, 56mins and 4 seconds to complete a single turn, which gives us a time discrepancy of 236 seconds or 3 minutes and 56 seconds.



Its the difference between sidereal and solar time.

Sidereal - the actual time it takes for the earth to turn, relative to the universe = 23hrs 56mins.
Solar - the time it takes for the sun to go from noon to noon = 24 hours.


The difference is because the earth is orbiting the sun, and that makes the sun a "moving target" with respect to the earth rotation.
In the 23hrs 56 minutes that it takes the earth to turn, the earth has also moved along a bit in its orbit and it needs an extra bit of time to turn a bit more for the same part to face the sun.

So... it depends what you're interested in.
If you're as astronomer, you might have more of an interest in Sidereal time. If you want to meet friends for lunch, you'd better pay attention to Solar time.

edit on 16-1-2013 by alfa1 because: spellinh mistakez



posted on Jan, 16 2013 @ 06:55 PM
link   

However, according to Earth, it takes 23hrs, 56mins and 4 seconds to complete a single turn, which gives us a time discrepancy of 236 seconds or 3 minutes and 56 seconds. And it takes 365.256363004 days to make one complete 360° orbit of our Su
reply to post by Sovaka
 


Could it be that the .256363004 makes up for the 236 seconds or 3 minutes and 56 seconds. of lost time through out the year?



posted on Jan, 16 2013 @ 06:57 PM
link   
True enough regarding Solar time which is an extension of time to make social interactions easy.
But not an accurate measurement of time


So which this in mind... Could the Mayan Calendar still be on track? :p



posted on Jan, 16 2013 @ 06:58 PM
link   
Well, we're not made in a way to notice a few moments over a long period. I'm not referring what scale we use for time, but what ever reason used to claim it's right or wrong.

An hour is pretty much a common segment in referencing time. "I'll see you in an hour/half an hour/2 hours" etc.

We really use hours as a time frame.

24 hours in a day. an hour for lunch.

If we spread those hours out over a very long time, then you'll see how it loses accuracy.

Because, like everything, there is very little by way of perfection in the fine details. We tend to round things up or down to make things fit, and because it doesn't affect what happens between 11:59 and 12:59 we tend to ignore it.

Or never notice it.

I mean realistically, if you can cast your mind back to yesterday... then the day before.. if someone were to live from the beginning of time, every single day is connected to the next. Today is just the continuation of yesterday. Sleep brings the illusion of a new day. Nothing really separates us from now and when humans lived in trees.. the very same ground the very same air.

What's a few minutes here or there when it's almost lunch and you're hungry...
edit on 16-1-2013 by winofiend because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 16 2013 @ 07:00 PM
link   
reply to post by thesmokingman
 


I'm not sure how they have measured the time it takes for an Orbit.
If the time it takes to Orbit is based off of the Solar time of 24 hours or if it's based off of Earth's rotation of 23hr 56m 4s...


edit on 16/1/2013 by Sovaka because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 16 2013 @ 07:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by alfa1

Originally posted by Sovaka
However, according to Earth, it takes 23hrs, 56mins and 4 seconds to complete a single turn, which gives us a time discrepancy of 236 seconds or 3 minutes and 56 seconds.



Its the difference between siderial and solar time.


It's "sidereal" but you're right, though. This is a non-issue.



posted on Jan, 16 2013 @ 07:11 PM
link   
I don't understand how you came to 687,061. Also, you need to add in leap years.


365.256363004 * 4 (minutes) = 1461.025452016 minutes = 24.35042420026667 hours a year

24.35042420026667 * 2013 = 49017.4039151368 hours = 2042.391829797367 days = 5.5916 years extra time in 2013 years, making it (theoretically) about 2008.

I don't understand your math.

And yeah, it's a non-issue as mentioned above.
edit on 16-1-2013 by SpearMint because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 16 2013 @ 07:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sovaka
I'm not sure how they have measured the time it takes for an Orbit.
.



Its done by looking at the stars, and seeing where we are in relation to the sun and them.

There's a famous example from ancient Egypt.

During the era of the Middle Kingdom, Egyptians based their calendar on the heliacal rising of Sirius, namely the day it becomes visible just before sunrise after moving far enough away from the glare of the Sun.
This occurred just before the annual flooding of the Nile...


What they were measuring was the time it takes for the earth to go one orbit around the sun.



posted on Jan, 16 2013 @ 07:22 PM
link   
365.256363004 days * 24 hrs = 8766.152712096 hrs * 108,000kph = 946,744,492.906368 kms.
Working with that; I get the following in Sidereal days of; 366.2567866342
Based off of that, I can update my calculator to give me a somewhat more accurate timescale of;
Current Calendar of 2012 - Days: 734,896; Hours: 17,637,499; Minutes: 1,058,249,955; Seconds: 63,494,997,324
Actual Calendar of 1880 - Days: 688,600; Hours: 16,481,263; Minutes: 988,875,792; Seconds: 59,332,547,500

So which ever way you look at it, we don't have an accurate measurement of time for our calendar.


Originally posted by SpearMint
I don't understand how you came to 687,061. Also, you need to add in leap years.


By calculating the actual seconds in 2012 years, then working backwards to get minutes, then hours, then days et c.
edit on 16/1/2013 by Sovaka because: ETA Quote
edit on 16/1/2013 by Sovaka because: Edit to modify calculations of Earth Sun Orbit
edit on 16/1/2013 by Sovaka because: More accurate calculations


So we actually pass 366.2567866342 days per 1 Earth Year based on the Sidereal time of 23hrs 56min and 4s.
No doubt there is some inaccuracy there based on the fact that Earth Orbit speed isn't exactly 108,000kph.

But my OP stands... Based off of real time VS social time... Our calendar is completely wrong in the scope of REAL ACTUAL time passage.
edit on 16/1/2013 by Sovaka because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 16 2013 @ 07:28 PM
link   
Interesting thread.....time always intrigues me. Does it even exist?

Made me wonder, do your measurements line up with any other predictions? If the Mayans 2012 isn't here yet, what year will it be?



posted on Jan, 16 2013 @ 07:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Sovaka
 





How could we have got it so wrong?
Oh I know how... Convenience of the 24 hour cycle to make everything neat and tidy...

The 24 hour cycle is manmade, derived from the actual time it takes for the Sun to be at the same position from day to day. Noon is 180 deg azimuth, no?



posted on Jan, 16 2013 @ 07:53 PM
link   
reply to post by SpearMint
 


This is the math I used;

Base Year: 2012
2012 * 365.256363004 = 734,896 Days
734,896 * 24 = 17,637,499 Hours
17,637,499 * 60 = 1,058,249,955 Minutes
1,058,249,955 * 60 = 63,494,997,324 Seconds

Modified Year:
Seconds = 3364/60*17,637,499*60 (Which is the Sidereal minutes divided by 60 to get hours * the Solar Mean hours to get the difference times 60 to get the Sidereal seconds)
Seconds = 59,332,547,500
Minutes = 59,332,547,500 / 60 = 988,875,792
Hours = 988,875,792 / 60 = 16,481,263
Days = 16,481,263 / 23.934444444 = 688,600
Years = 688,600 / 366.2567866342 (Sidereal days based off previous post calculation) = 1880



posted on Jan, 16 2013 @ 07:54 PM
link   
reply to post by timetothink
 


Time exists, but it isn't Linear as we experience it... It is fluid.

The time as we measure it, is an incorrect measurement to fit our sensibilities.



posted on Jan, 16 2013 @ 08:12 PM
link   
In all honesty, the whole idea of time, numbers, days...etc. is a farce. Being that all of the aforementioned things are of human design, they are by their very existance flawed.... Time does not really exist, it is meerly a baton that has been passed down to us as a means to give us some
thing to do.... alot like giving a monkey a flashlight; somerhing they have no concept of, its just there to occupy thwm....



posted on Jan, 16 2013 @ 08:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sovaka
reply to post by SpearMint
 


This is the math I used;

Base Year: 2012
2012 * 365.256363004 = 734,896 Days
734,896 * 24 = 17,637,499 Hours
17,637,499 * 60 = 1,058,249,955 Minutes
1,058,249,955 * 60 = 63,494,997,324 Seconds

Modified Year:
Seconds = 3364/60*17,637,499*60 (Which is the Sidereal minutes divided by 60 to get hours * the Solar Mean hours to get the difference times 60 to get the Sidereal seconds)
Seconds = 59,332,547,500
Minutes = 59,332,547,500 / 60 = 988,875,792
Hours = 988,875,792 / 60 = 16,481,263
Days = 16,481,263 / 23.934444444 = 688,600
Years = 688,600 / 366.2567866342 (Sidereal days based off previous post calculation) = 1880


There's no way 4 minutes a day equates to 133 years difference though. I'm not sure where the 3364 comes from.



posted on Jan, 16 2013 @ 08:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by SpearMint
There's no way 4 minutes a day equates to 133 years difference though. I'm not sure where the 3364 comes from.


As I stated, the 3364 is the Sidereal seconds minus the 236 second discrepancy.

4 * 365 * 2012 = 2,937,520 minutes.
2,937,520 / 60 = 48,958.66666666667 Hours
48,958.66666666667 / 24 = 2,039.944444444444 Days
2,039.944444444444 / 365 = 5.588888888888889 Years
Slight variance in the above due to not taking the .265 days (leap year).

It does give a different result... But when you break down the calculation as I have shown in a previous post, the time factor actually blows at as the time effect compounds per year.

If you load up MS Excel or Open Office Calc and put in those numbers yourself, you will see how much it blows out.



posted on Jan, 16 2013 @ 08:28 PM
link   
Nice post i often wonder the same thing but have you tried to look at it this way and there is maybe that thought of copensation whats holding the door through from behind in is which is that since we had time is started with a face it is round we have choice we built the watch and whatever you want goes on thereit isnt hard to adjust ok thats point 1 next is what if i say our watches needed a wind back in the olden times thats what was needed so thats something in itslef that takes time today we have wonderfull electric watches nothing ever can go wrong with them except they arent eternalnothing here on earth lasts an eternity unless god wants it to does plan that for the devil maybe so maybe that why we learn from our mistakes and so if we strain ourelfs in on the eternal clock we will probably break the laws of god and what he has intended for time because we as his followers are the same like Adam and Eve, Is that so he can test us if you answer no then ask yourself did he try to test Adam and Eve he offered them life on earth forever anyway if you think about this hard enough i have though this over and over time has its forever and look at the the word forever and think are there law telling you that things are around IN WHICH you shall NEVER, we all no about keeping our self pure so that we never break the law and loose track of things like if you would say i guess what im saying we are not fit for things that are eternal or perfectly flawless to make our lives seem easy. But my point is you and me didnt create the earth or the sun so something i think we could only uderstand as being perfect is the way of einstiens theory of relativity works, that or either manipulation i have a but but i will bring it up after my 3 and final point.
So we know time needed to be wound to give us knowledge of how like saying you seeing the sun in the west close to the horizon you definately dont set out on foot far far away if you wanted to sleep say 8:30 so politically thinking out loud when was time carried or stored first was it accurate and if so is it more so available today the answer is yes i think. I also reckon by looking at olden day watch or clock you can see how us humans can tune them to work however we want but the thing would have been needing a wind every day or day and a half and what happens if you look and a wrist watch that can totally end up in a total scale theres always a spot for keeping it if you look after it but compare that with a pocket watch of the past you can decide a little diferently according to proffit of PURchasing watch that didnt break down i think its something that can paint a story especially compared to backup system meter wars and all the sorts of discern in nature of item condition and technology changes so these two things arent exacly the same but technology has moved up and in our face teaches us to lie did you here what im saying technology is teaching us to lie look at it from the point there a clock on the wall running by a battery 1 next main clock on the wall 2 next a wrist watch dependant on batteries next a alarm clock which can be a humungus catch according to the liable side of things because of the dependancy and way in wich it can stop, now can i ask is todays technology service of time better than the day of old well depends on how you carry your time i think you DECIDE what you DEPEND on and you can be the better person because of it, im not calling this my philosophy because im just adding it all together while im typing it but i reckon it makes good sense i sense there is a pattern through ages so what will be the answer on the time before human had manufactured clocks and watches they would get time as they saw it not a great amount of sophistication to it except perhaps that it can be realisticly prooven, Agree, or not? The pocket watch, need to be read you have to know what a number is second check to see the thing is running on time so reading has its knowledge about it so long as you have the thing wound and know in time to give it a re-wind you are keeping time something that is more you need to have a reliable source that is in a workable timetable now remember the word reliable source because in theory relativity has allot of chmeistry in it in the way of what we do to pass time or passing of time through speed we travel i'd like to question the ground to this because if we take into account his accelerated part the time we carry with us or it changes around with us by speeding up i beleive that this can be put to a question which will lie on either will or never have you every tried to run gradually picking up and reaching your fastest or taking a shortcut while walking well time is a whole lot more that that wouldn't you say I mean what isn't there to do with time in fact more and more about doing less labour and finding lesser waste is my third point Continued next===>



posted on Jan, 16 2013 @ 08:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sovaka

Originally posted by SpearMint
There's no way 4 minutes a day equates to 133 years difference though. I'm not sure where the 3364 comes from.


As I stated, the 3364 is the Sidereal seconds minus the 236 second discrepancy.

4 * 365 * 2012 = 2,937,520 minutes.
2,937,520 / 60 = 48,958.66666666667 Hours
48,958.66666666667 / 24 = 2,039.944444444444 Days
2,039.944444444444 / 365 = 5.588888888888889 Years
Slight variance in the above due to not taking the .265 days (leap year).

It does give a different result... But when you break down the calculation as I have shown in a previous post, the time factor actually blows at as the time effect compounds per year.

If you load up MS Excel or Open Office Calc and put in those numbers yourself, you will see how much it blows out.


Exactly, it's about 5 years difference, I used the decimal points in the above post.



posted on Jan, 16 2013 @ 08:39 PM
link   
Such a wall of text without paragraphs or punctuation...

A little hard to read...

We are all in agreement that our concept of time is man-made but that being said, the need for time is sometimes paramount when you need to measure the duration of an action.
Oxygenation is a good example; as with oxygenation, you need to ensure you get X Liters per minute in order to provide enough oxygen.
Other simple scenarios of the like et c.

However the main objective of the OP was to get a sense of scale of our inaccuracy and how we measure that against such a vital tool of our society and economy, which is our Calendar.





new topics

top topics



 
17
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join