Sunrise/Sunset is off by 16 minutes since 1861 Farmer's Almanac Published

reply to post by mikegrouchy


Thanks.

Those difference in seconds comes to 2.95 seconds per year according to your numbers.

Since 1861 that would be a total of 7.47 minutes difference.

We're still left with about 8 minutes of a discrepancy.

reply to post by CircleOfDust

We're still left with about 8 minutes of a discrepancy.

Read Erictheawfuls post on page 1 as that should clear up any discrepancies you can find.

reply to post by InhaleExhale


I did, and that's why I'm still waiting for an answer to my question. Until then, nothings cleared up at all.

Edit to add:

Oops I spoke too soon. I thought you were referencing Phage's info.

The answer to his I would say is that the time is fitted for Boston, as is the naval's observatory when you punch it in.

We still have discrepancy Houston.

Originally posted by CircleOfDust
reply to post by Phage

 

So looking at your image there was a 24 minute time difference between Boston and DC.

Is this what you mean?

Sort of. Not exactly.
The modern calculations for sunrise/sunset use standardized time zones. In 1861 there were no standardized time zones so it is no wonder that the calculations do not match.

reply to post by CircleOfDust

The answer to his I would say is that the time is fitted for Boston, as is the naval's observatory when you punch it in. We still have discrepancy Houston.

If its an average for all of the New England states, whats in Eric post clears any discrepancies you have brought up.

If it was fitted for Boston then Phages post about Greenwich mean time clears up the discrepancy, if its an average for all the New England states then find the times used to come up with the average and one of those should match whats on the navy site as that is localized and not an average over a number of states.

reply to post by Phage


Okay, but the only discrepancy you've shown me is one of 24 minutes. That still leaves, well,a discrepancy.

reply to post by CircleOfDust

Twenty four minutes between what and what? Look at the chart. In New York state the time varied wildly based on where you were. There was no standardized time. Today if you are in New York state, the time will be the same where ever in the state you are.

The point is there was no basis for the time of sunrise in Boston other than the time in Boston. We don't know what time 07:14 was in Boston in 1861. The clocks in Boston were set to Boston time and we don't know how that compared to Greenwich time.

There was no comparison to Greenwich time as there is now. The Navy calculations are based on Greenwich standarized time. There was no Greenwich standardized time in 1861. You cannot make a meaningful comparison between the almanac and the modern calculations. The discrepancy is because Boston time was Boston time, not Eastern Standard Time.

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by CircleOfDust

 

Twenty four minutes between what and what? Look at the chart. In New York state the time varied wildly based on where you were. There was no standardized time. Today if you are in New York state, the time will be the same where ever in the state you are.

The point is there was no basis for the time of sunrise in Boston other than the time in Boston. We don't know what time 07:14 was in Boston in 1861. The clocks in Boston were set to Boston time and we don't know how that compared to Greenwich time.

There was no comparison to Greenwich time as there is now. The Navy calculations are based on Greenwich standarized time. There was no Greenwich standardized time in 1861. You cannot make a meaningful comparison between the almanac and the modern calculations. The discrepancy is because Boston time was Boston time, not Eastern Standard Time.

I have looked at the chart, that is why I said 24 minutes. If you look at the chart, the time for Boston is

12:24 pm

That is compared to DC time, which was noon.

I think you're just hand-waving.

Here is the testimony of someone from New England dated February 1st 1861

He is upset. Weather the stuff he has was wrong on purpose or not, it is still wrong.

THE ALLEN RASPBERRY AGAIN.

BY L. P. ALLEN, BUFFALO, N. Y.

In your January paper, the Committee of the East-
em Pennsylvania Fruit Growers' Society say they
meant no personality or charge of deception — that is
the gist of it — on my part, but simply an "error" in
sending out other plants than the "Allen" raspberry
to the public. In my remarks in the December
number, I did not mean to say that they had charged
me with "deception." But whether my plants were
wrong through error on my part, or intended decep-
tion, the consequence to the receiver of them would
be the same, to wit : A different thing from that or
those which he expected to receive instead of the
genuine.

My reply that I did not cultivate any other rasp-
berry plants than the "Allen" and "Red Prolific,"
and therefore could not and did not send out any
other varieties, which I here repeat, ought to be suf-
ficient, so far as I am concerned. But "the Com-
mittee" now meet that disclaimer, with the assertion
of Mr. Freas, of the Germanloum Telegraph, that he
got plants from me for those two varieties, neither of
which were the "Allen," and that after proving them
so, and worthless, to boot, he threw them out. Now
is not Mr. Freas mistaken as to the identity of his
plants ?

If I am not mistaken, a pomologist in one of the in-
terior counties of Pennsylvania, soon after my plants
went into the vicinity of Philadelphia, asserted in the
Germantown Telegraphy that he had the "Allen," oi
a raspberry like it, in cultivation, which had been in
his grounds for some years, and proposed growing
them side by side to compare them, or something of
the sort. I did not keep the copy of the Telegraph
containing this notice, which Mr. Freas was kind
enough to send me, and cannot now state the least
particulars. I simply wish to ask "the Committee"
the question, whether or not, Mr. Freas had any
other raspberry plants from any other person, and
cultivated them at the time he had the "Allen" in his
grounds ? If so, could he not have got them inter-
mixed or confused, one for the other ?

The "writer" of the committee's report says, Hhat
he examined the two varieties of raspberry plant
which Mr. Freas received from me, and that neither
of them was the Allen, ' to a certainty.' " Here is a
contradiction — point blank — no mistake about it, so
far as the committee and Mr. Freas are concerned on
one hand, and myself the other. "A question of
veracity," as gentlemen of punctilio would have it.
How is the fact to be settled ? Either Mr. Freas must
have been mistaken as to the identity of the plants
he received from me, or the gentleman of the com-
mittee who examine them was not an accurate
judge of what the "Allen" raspberry is, or I com-
mitted an error in sending out variety of plant
which I did not grow and did not have in my pos-
session, and which it was impossible for me to send
out, as I sent out no others than the two varieties
which I did grow; or, further, the package got
changed on the way to Philadelphia.

I intend no personalities towards any gentleman ;
on the other hand, the parties are personally un-
known to me, and I can entertain no other senti-
ment towards them than those of entire respect, such
as their position in the community entitles them to.

Thus I leave the whole subject.
As to the "hardiness" of the "Allen" variety, and
the Red Prolific also, I have had several thousand
plants of them both standing in my grounds, unpro-
tected through the winter, for eight or ten years past,
and never, to my knowledge, lost a single cane by
the frost or cold weather ; my latitude is a few minutes
less than 43 north. [color=gold] Black Rock, February 1, 1861.

archive.org /gardeners monthly/ 1861

In the same spirit,
I bet the sun rose in 1861 whenever
the committee in charge said it did, and no later.


Mike

reply to post by CircleOfDust



Your comparing

Boston, Massachusetts?
and
Washington DC both Maryland and Virginia?


and wondering why the difference of 24 minutes?


is this correct?

Originally posted by InhaleExhale
reply to post by CircleOfDust

 

Your comparing

Boston, Massachusetts?
and
Washington DC both Maryland and Virginia?


and wondering why the difference of 24 minutes?


is this correct?

I'm not sure why you're bringing in Maryland and Va.

From his chart:

upload.wikimedia.org...

It states everywhere that it's comparing all times to noon at washington dc.

reply to post by mikegrouchy


Well, wow what can I say? You really must've done some digging to find that little piece of buried treasure, going all the way back to 1861 and Feb of that year no less.

Thanks?

Originally posted by CircleOfDust

Originally posted by InhaleExhale
reply to post by CircleOfDust

 

Your comparing

Boston, Massachusetts?
and
Washington DC both Maryland and Virginia?


and wondering why the difference of 24 minutes?


is this correct?

I'm not sure why you're bringing in Maryland and Va.

From his chart:

upload.wikimedia.org...

It states everywhere that it's comparing all times to noon at washington dc.

Lets try again shall we


Your comparing Boston and Washington DC and wondering why the time difference?

is this correct,

a simple yes or no so I can get on the page your on.

Originally posted by InhaleExhale

Originally posted by CircleOfDust

Originally posted by InhaleExhale
reply to post by CircleOfDust

 

Your comparing

Boston, Massachusetts?
and
Washington DC both Maryland and Virginia?


and wondering why the difference of 24 minutes?


is this correct?

I'm not sure why you're bringing in Maryland and Va.

From his chart:

upload.wikimedia.org...

It states everywhere that it's comparing all times to noon at washington dc.

Lets try again shall we


Your comparing Boston and Washington DC and wondering why the time difference?

is this correct,

a simple yes or no so I can get on the page your on.

no

I would not rely on something that was published in 1861 as being the most accurate information if at all possible.

First, the almanac was published with a list of tables that come from other tables made prior to 1861, and has been pointed out REPEATEDLY to you, time zones had not been standardized, nor do we know where the exact location for those tables came from. They may have been tables that were originally drawn up with information from another location, but because it's close to Boston, it was "close enough".

I pointed out that the book is intended for all the New England states and you "decided to go with" Boston.

What you decide to go with isn't good enough.

Instead of trying to depend upon a publication that was predicting when sunrise and sunset would be for the calendar year of 1861, why not instead, search the internet for documents that have the times of sunrise and sunset that were RECORDED for Boston, Mass. in 1861?.

You would have a better argument that something is amiss if you can find the actual recorded data, instead of using a farmer's almanac that was published in 1861, especially since it's simply a table that someone put in a book, and not what was actually, directly observed............

Originally posted by CircleOfDust
reply to post by mikegrouchy

 

Well, wow what can I say? You really must've done some digging to find that little piece of buried treasure, going all the way back to 1861 and Feb of that year no less.

Thanks?

And this from the Chambers Journal




Bain pendulum clock

Chambers Journal

From the [color=gold] 1861 Edition, page 1

"Electric Clocks and Ship Chronometers".

A chatty article describing a visit to the Liverpool Observatory where the author is shown around by the astronomer, Mr Hartnup. The electric synchronising apparatus of R.L.Jones of Chester is explained, being fitted to a [color=gold] Bain pendulum clock, and being able to regulate other similar clocks. The author speculates on the advantage of the more extensive use of this system in domestic environments. Ends with an interesting account of the chronometer testing facility of the Observatory.

British Horological Institute / collection of articles

Looks like Academia was just beginning to consider the concept of synchronizing clocks as achievable in the near future. And further, that a pendulum clock was the best standard of the day.





This is what they had in Boston at the time.
Not the buildings around it, they are more modern.
But the church is from the 1775.




That and the E. Howard Watch & Clock Company
incorporated in Boston in 1861 for the first time,
so they hadn't even started production yet.



Mike

Originally posted by eriktheawful
I would not rely on something that was published in 1861 as being the most accurate information if at all possible.

First, the almanac was published with a list of tables that come from other tables made prior to 1861, and has been pointed out REPEATEDLY to you, time zones had not been standardized, nor do we know where the exact location for those tables came from. They may have been tables that were originally drawn up with information from another location, but because it's close to Boston, it was "close enough".

I pointed out that the book is intended for all the New England states and you "decided to go with" Boston.

What you decide to go with isn't good enough.

Instead of trying to depend upon a publication that was predicting when sunrise and sunset would be for the calendar year of 1861, why not instead, search the internet for documents that have the times of sunrise and sunset that were RECORDED for Boston, Mass. in 1861?.

You would have a better argument that something is amiss if you can find the actual recorded data, instead of using a farmer's almanac that was published in 1861, especially since it's simply a table that someone put in a book, and not what was actually, directly observed............

Ok, two points.

First, you're mistaken about what I'm going with. It's what the almanac claims, not me. It's fitted for Boston. I can't get any clearer than this can I?

Second, there are no available recorded times available on the WEB that I can find.

I hope you can understand these two things. They seem easy enough.

reply to post by mikegrouchy


Still lots of digging.

Thanks?

Originally posted by CircleOfDust
reply to post by mikegrouchy

 

Still lots of digging.

Thanks?

If I could find a journal of a student at the Yale Observatory on the morning of February 1st 1861 I would have linked it already.

Alas...

But I suspect that no other clock in any of the New England areas would have been synchronized to the Yale Observatory clock anyway.


Mike

Originally posted by CircleOfDust

Originally posted by eriktheawful
I would not rely on something that was published in 1861 as being the most accurate information if at all possible.

First, the almanac was published with a list of tables that come from other tables made prior to 1861, and has been pointed out REPEATEDLY to you, time zones had not been standardized, nor do we know where the exact location for those tables came from. They may have been tables that were originally drawn up with information from another location, but because it's close to Boston, it was "close enough".

I pointed out that the book is intended for all the New England states and you "decided to go with" Boston.

What you decide to go with isn't good enough.

Instead of trying to depend upon a publication that was predicting when sunrise and sunset would be for the calendar year of 1861, why not instead, search the internet for documents that have the times of sunrise and sunset that were RECORDED for Boston, Mass. in 1861?.

You would have a better argument that something is amiss if you can find the actual recorded data, instead of using a farmer's almanac that was published in 1861, especially since it's simply a table that someone put in a book, and not what was actually, directly observed............

Ok, two points.

First, you're mistaken about what I'm going with. It's what the almanac claims, not me. It's fitted for Boston. I can't get any clearer than this can I?

Second, there are no available recorded times available on the WEB that I can find.

I hope you can understand these two things. They seem easy enough.

The almanac says that it's for Boston AND all New England states. And we've shown that sunrise and sunset is not the same times for all across New England.

Sure there is data available on the web. Some documents you may have to order to view them, like here:

National Archives Guide To Federal Records

If you insist on using that 1861 almanac as your proof that something is wrong, you're going to have to show beyond a shadow of a doubt that the tables located in the book were originally drawn up for where downtown Boston is today, with no doubt what so ever.

And I think you're going to have a hard time doing that.

In any case, again, it's much better to show what was actually OBSERVED to be the times for Sunrise and Sunset in Boston than a table that was drawn up before anything was observed.