LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for DATETIME Archives


DATETIME Archives

DATETIME Archives


DATETIME@C4VLPLISTSERV01.LOC.GOV


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

DATETIME Home

DATETIME Home

DATETIME  November 2015

DATETIME November 2015

Subject:

Re: 1/27 conference call notes: an instant can't be on 3 different days

From:

Nick Matthews <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

[log in to unmask]

Date:

Mon, 23 Nov 2015 23:24:42 +0000

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (90 lines)

Hi,

If we consider only local time, when the sun is directly over the the 
180degW (or 180degE) line of longitude the the western hemisphere will 
have one date and the eastern hemisphere will have the previous date. By 
the time the sun is directly overhead on the prime meridian the whole of 
Earth will be experiencing the same day.

When we add time zones into the mix, and the fact that the international 
date line zig-zags, it gets a bit more complicated, but I think that it 
is always the case that there are no more than two dates in use at any 
one time.

Nick


On 23/11/2015 9:57 PM, Edward C. Zimmermann wrote:
> Correct. But since the earthly instant might have occured anywhere on the
> planet we have a span of 3 days (+- 1). While any event measured in minutes
> can have occured on up to two different local time zone days if we don't
> have the measure of time nor even the location, we don't know if the event
> could have be reported by another location on the planet on the previous
> calendar day or the next.
> Imagine a date/time reported in a database as 2010-12-12T01:00 without
> knowledge of the "local time" where reported.. If it was Baker Island.. If
> it was Kiritimati.... Searching with a date/time specified in UTC in such a
> database.. What is the match? What is the precision?
>
>
> On Mon, 23 Nov 2015 20:35:54 +0000, Byrd, Donald A. wrote
>> There's only one International Date Line; time zones on the earth span
> just 24 hours. So it seems to me an instant can't be on more than two
> different days, regardless of where and when it occurs. Munich's time zone
> is nine (I think) hours west of the Date Line, so an event at, say, 11:45
> PM on Nov. 30 there is on December 1 anywhere more than a few hundred
> kilometers (or some such) to its east, up to the date line. It's 15 hours
> from the Date Line in the other direction, so the earliest it can be in any
> time zone is 15 hours earlier, i.e., 8:45 AM on Nov. 30.
>>
>> Furthermore, an instant also can't be on _less_ than two different days,
> regardless of where and when it occurs. Well, it could be argued that an
> instant at exactly midnight somewhere is an exception! Anyway, for
> practical purposes, every instantaneous event occurs on exactly two
> different days.
>>
>> Am I thinking clearly?
>>
>> --Don
>>
>> On Nov 19, 2015, at 5:13 PM, "Denenberg, Ray" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>>> So Neil [WINDOWS-1252?]Armstrong’s moon event is nominally 1969-07-20,
> [WINDOWS-1252?]that’s the [WINDOWS-1252?]“official” date that it occurred
> (nevermind that it was on the moon, [WINDOWS-1252?]let’s just say July 20
> is the [WINDOWS-1252?]“real” date, for discussion sake). Some observers may
> have recorded it as July 19.   And I suppose somewhere else it was recorded
> as July 21.  Would you call this [WINDOWS-1252?]“two-day” precision?
> Three-day precision?
>>>
>>> An event in Munich may occur close to midnight so it is the next day in
> Samoa (and the previous day somewhere else?)  But it might be November 30
> in Munich, so it is December in Samoa, or it might be December 31 in Munich
> so it is the next year in Samoa.  So the first case is 2 (or 3) day
> precision, the second is month precision and the third year precision.  And
> maybe it occurred 2009, so there you have decade precision.
>>>
>>> Still, all these examples are based on cases where the estimate is no
> more than a day off.  I [WINDOWS-1252?]don’t think I can convince the ISO
> people based on that. Are there other examples?
>>>
>>> Ray
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Discussion of the Developing Date/Time Standards
>>>>
>>>> [---- SNIP ----]
>>
>> ---
>> Donald Byrd
>> Woodrow Wilson Indiana Teaching Fellow
>> Adjunct Associate Professor of Informatics
>> Visiting Scientist, Research Technologies
>> Indiana University Bloomington
>
>
> --
>
> Edward C. Zimmermann, NONMONOTONIC LAB
>

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

August 2019
February 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
January 2018
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
August 2016
July 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
December 2014
November 2014
March 2014
September 2013
May 2013
February 2013
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
May 2012
March 2012
December 2011
November 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager