Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

who organized and decided on how the time works in life ?

for example there is 24 hrs a day 60 mins an HR 60 secs a min how come they decided on that and not 48 hrs a day and 30 mins an hr

and who ever decided on it how did he or she convice the entire world to follow that ?

like maybe in some countries im sure they would have disagreed with how the time got organized since other contries fight over religion and stuff since day 1 why dont they argue over time and dates. like maybe on their calendar they wanted it to be 365 days a year but more months with less days.

how did it get all straighten out and who organized it to how it is today ?

The Atlantians.

Originally posted by chomperx9
who organized and decided on how the time works in life ?

for example there is 24 hrs a day 60 mins an HR 60 secs a min how come they decided on that and not 48 hrs a day and 30 mins an hr

and who ever decided on it how did he or she convice the entire world to follow that ?

like maybe in some countries im sure they would have disagreed with how the time got organized since other contries fight over religion and stuff since day 1 why dont they argue over time and dates. like maybe on their calendar they wanted it to be 365 days a year but more months with less days.

how did it get all straighten out and who organized it to how it is today ?

Apparently it was widespread, due to a prevalence of a duodecimal system (which actually has a few advantages over a decimal system). So basically you divided daytime into twelve hours and night into twelve thereby getting to 24 hours for a full day.

Hours and seconds are similarly defined by as 60 is a good denominator in a 12er system.

Of course modern definitions are different, like seconds are defined by vibrations of molecules or something.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Apparently it was widespread, due to a prevalence of a duodecimal system (which actually has a few advantages over a decimal system). So basically you divided daytime into twelve hours and night into twelve thereby getting to 24 hours for a full day.

Hours and seconds are similarly defined by as 60 is a good denominator in a 12er system.

Of course modern definitions are different, like seconds are defined by vibrations of molecules or something.


"You seem to like to share you knowledge with others."


Also, I thought time was now measured by a specific distance light travels, in a vacuum. I could be wrong. I haven't checked on that SI stuff since highschool.

Originally posted by dadudemon
"You seem to like to share you knowledge with others."


Also, I thought time was now measured by a specific distance light travels, in a vacuum. I could be wrong. I haven't checked on that SI stuff since highschool.

You might be right. However it obviously hangs together. If you do it that way you first have to define length.


Well I checked, what you said is actually how length is defined, but you can check them all here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SI_base_unit

what would it have been like if it was 1second=a full day?

Originally posted by Colossus-Big C
what would it have been like if it was 1second=a full day?

Then the word day would be replaced with Second. That is all.

Originally posted by Colossus-Big C
what would it have been like if it was 1second=a full day?

Man, you ask the most insane question, bro.

Originally posted by Colossus-Big C
what would it have been like if it was 1second=a full day?

We had to work this out in a physics class.


I don't remember what we did.

But you have t obe traveling like 99.9999% of C do accomplish that, I believe. That's just a rough estimate of something I don't remember. (it could be more decimal places....)

I understand a year (roughly one solar rotation), a month (based on lunar rotations, sort of), a day (on turn about the axis)...

But where does a week come from? It doesn't divide cleanly into any of the higher measurements, nor does it seem to derive from any actual physical thing that people could have measured, but across the world it seems universally accepted.

Originally posted by dadudemon
We had to work this out in a physics class.


I don't remember what we did.

But you have t obe traveling like 99.9999% of C do accomplish that, I believe. That's just a rough estimate of something I don't remember. (it could be more decimal places....)

99.99999999330204% to be precise.

Originally posted by King Kandy
I understand a year (roughly one solar rotation), a month (based on lunar rotations, sort of), a day (on turn about the axis)...

But where does a week come from? It doesn't divide cleanly into any of the higher measurements, nor does it seem to derive from any actual physical thing that people could have measured, but across the world it seems universally accepted. Well I think that comes from the prevalence of Judaism and later Christianity. Not sure why it is 7 though. I guess it just seemed like a good number to take a day off

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
99.99999999330204% to be precise.

Wait, where did you find that? I looked and couldn't find. (It's a hyperbolic (eff, I don't know what that word is...I thought it was hyperbolic) function and it is a long flat line until you get to a significant percentage of C, and then it goes all geometric. I can't find that function.)

Originally posted by Bardock42
Well I think that comes from the prevalence of Judaism and later Christianity. Not sure why it is 7 though. I guess it just seemed like a good number to take a day off
I guess that it was always my assumption that the creation was written as 7 days because that was 1 week, not the other way around...

Originally posted by King Kandy
I guess that it was always my assumption that the creation was written as 7 days because that was 1 week, not the other way around... so 1 week in creation time could of just been a mere second.

Originally posted by Colossus-Big C
so 1 week in creation time could of just been a mere second.
That's not even remotely close to what I was saying.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Wait, where did you find that? I looked and couldn't find. (It's a hyperbolic (eff, I don't know what that word is...I thought it was hyperbolic) function and it is a long flat line until you get to a significant percentage of C, and then it goes all geometric. I can't find that function.)

A Lorentz factor of 86400 is reached at 0.9999999999330204c. There are 86400 seconds in one day. QED

Originally posted by King Kandy
I guess that it was always my assumption that the creation was written as 7 days because that was 1 week, not the other way around...

Yeah, I would agree, however I am saying it became so popular because of it.

Maybe so, but I still want to know what the original point was.

Originally posted by King Kandy
That's not even remotely close to what I was saying.

Originally posted by King Kandy
Maybe so, but I still want to know what the original point was.

You mean why some cultures chose 7 some 10, etc.?

Well 7 apparent is about 1/4th of the moon phase, so that's probably why one might choose 7.

Originally posted by Bardock42
You mean why some cultures chose 7 some 10, etc.?

Well 7 apparent is about 1/4th of the moon phase, so that's probably why one might choose 7.
Ah, that makes sense. So on a lunar calendar, a week is actually cleanly divisible and makes sense.

Originally posted by chomperx9
who organized and decided on how the time works in life ?

for example there is 24 hrs a day 60 mins an HR 60 secs a min how come they decided on that and not 48 hrs a day and 30 mins an hr

and who ever decided on it how did he or she convice the entire world to follow that ?

like maybe in some countries im sure they would have disagreed with how the time got organized since other contries fight over religion and stuff since day 1 why dont they argue over time and dates. like maybe on their calendar they wanted it to be 365 days a year but more months with less days.

how did it get all straighten out and who organized it to how it is today ?


father time did

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
A Lorentz factor of 86400 is reached at 0.9999999999330204c. There are 86400 seconds in one day. QED


HOOORAY! I found it. All I needed was a lead, and Lorentz factor did it fer me, instuff. Thanks, man.

Wait, I did the math, and I'm not getting the same thing as you. I got .999988....bla bla bla.


I'll have to read over about it, again, but show me what you did, if you read this before I get back.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Wait, I did the math, and I'm not getting the same thing as you. I got .999988....bla bla bla.


I'll have to read over about it, again, but show me what you did, if you read this before I get back.

I didn't do any math except to figure out how many seconds there are in a day.

http://www.1728.com/reltivty.htm (4th button)

But lets go through the math as I understand it:

t = t'/(1-v^2/c^2)^1/2

t=outside time
t'=own time
v=a fraction of light speed

using wolfram|alpha:

86400 = 1/(1-(vc)^2/c^2)^1/2
which reduces to
86400=1/(1-v^2)^1/2
which reduces to
(7464959999^1/2)/86400
which equals
0.99999999993302.....

Originally posted by Bardock42
Man, you ask the most insane question, bro.

Maybe there is a planet that spins incredibly quick? Reminds me of that one Star Trek episode..I can't remember what is was, but some ship was witnessing the birth and evolution of a species on a planet in real-time. Seconds were passing in space, but on the surface of the planet time was moving at a much faster rate.

This thread is blowin' my mind.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
I didn't do any math except to figure out how many seconds there are in a day.

http://www.1728.com/reltivty.htm (4th button)

But lets go through the math as I understand it:

t = t'/(1-v^2/c^2)^1/2

t=outside time
t'=own time
v=a fraction of light speed

using wolfram|alpha:

86400 = 1/(1-(vc)^2/c^2)^1/2
which reduces to
86400=1/(1-v^2)^1/2
which reduces to
(7464959999^1/2)/86400
which equals
0.99999999993302.....

Yeah, your math works out correctly.

However, I dont' know where you got your C from in second step:

86400 = 1/(1-(vc)^2/c^2)^1/2

How did you go from:

86400= 1/(1-(v^2)/(c^2))^1/2

to

86400 = 1/(1-(vc)^2/(c^2))^1/2


An extra C was added to the the bottom numerator.

I used the identity and came up with 86400 = 1/(((C^2)-(v^2))/(c^2))^(1/2)


That still does not equal your work.


I assume C = 29979000 m/s

I also assume v is not 0 and is positive (lulz).

(86400^2 - 1) = 7464959999

So, I understand where that number came from (I assume that, eventually, the 1 is subtracted from the other side at some point after the square root is elminated from each side.)

I think this is just a problem of me forgetting how to do algebra.

I didn't know if it was useful, so I found the derivative:

-((2 v^2)/(C^3)-(2 v v'(C))/C^2)/(2 (1-(v^2)/C^2)^(3/2)) (This took a while.)


I didn't find a use for this...but I thought it would help.

I found what the derivative would be if it was divided by -((2 v^2)/(C^3)-(2 v v'(C))/C^2)/(2 (1-(v^2)/C^2)^(3/2))


Any guesses?

Originally posted by Bardock42
I found what the derivative would be if it was divided by -((2 v^2)/(C^3)-(2 v v'(C))/C^2)/(2 (1-(v^2)/C^2)^(3/2))


Any guesses?

No.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Yeah, your math works out correctly.

However, I dont' know where you got your C from in second step:

86400 = 1/(1-(vc)^2/c^2)^1/2

How did you go from:

86400= 1/(1-(v^2)/(c^2))^1/2

to

86400 = 1/(1-(vc)^2/(c^2))^1/2

Since I was solving for velocity I couldn't write out the value of v. However all possible speeds can be written as a value (between 1 and 0) multiplied by c. I probably should have written it as:

86400= 1/(1-(v^2)/(c^2))^1/2

where v = x*c

and then

86400= 1/(1-((xc)^2)/(c^2))^1/2

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Since I was solving for velocity I couldn't write out the value of v. However all possible speeds can be written as a value (between 1 and 0) multiplied by c. I probably should have written it as:

86400= 1/(1-(v^2)/(c^2))^1/2

where v = x*c

and then

86400= 1/(1-((xc)^2)/(c^2))^1/2


Dude, that's sweet. Makes perfect sense and it puts into perspective what each of the variables represent.

It was a slow morning at work, today, so I had time to pretend to know what I was doing.

Originally posted by dadudemon
It was a slow morning at work, today, so I had time to pretend to know what I was doing.

that has little to do with a slow morning at work, or it being today

Originally posted by dadudemon
No.

It's 1.





1!

Originally posted by inimalist
that has little to do with a slow morning at work, or it being today



Context.

Slow morning at work means: I had time to mess around with this and waste time.

Originally posted by Bardock42
It's 1.





1!

I thought you meant to find the derivative of the derivative and divde that by derivative.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Context.

Slow morning at work means: I had time to mess around with this and waste time.

fair enough, the joke was that you generally pretend at what you are doing

Originally posted by dadudemon


I thought you meant to find the derivative of the derivative and divde that by derivative.

That's way too bothersome. Totally not me.

http://incogman.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/stengel-managing-editor-time.jpg

Richard Stengel,
Managing Editor

Originally posted by Bardock42
That's way too bothersome. Totally not me.

Indeed. That's why I gave you the plain "no" with the straight face. No way in hell I was going to do that.



Originally posted by inimalist
fair enough, the joke was that you generally pretend at what you are doing

Makes sense. hmm

If someone came over to my desk, they'd think I was doing work because it looked like I was doing math. (in actuality, it was me trying to figure out how the **** SC got what he got, but not getting anywhere.)