Cycling Road
New member
I was asked to do a favor by Max to repeat the same question that was unfairly reported. Perhaps someone is stalking my buddy and that is not ok. He asked it exactly like this "How's the sidereal days increasing in length while decreasing in clock hours?" Wouldn't it just have been correct to post it like "How are the sidereal days increasing in length while decreasing in clock hours?" For some reason, we English speakers in America especially when some question in Astronomy is urgent, we don't always remember to speak or type in proper English based on grammatical rules. But that's not why I think they reported it. I believe Nyx is doing this. But which one is correct and take a look at the question details since he told me to ask this. Do you think he's actually good at his grammar that he says he is?
I haven't yet to prove anything. In 99998 BC the sidereal day was 23.93447 hours and now it's 23.93446 hours. So as you can see if the sidereal day is getting longer, how is it decreasing in clock hours?
Your stories don't seem to add up. The average length of the sidereal day on Starry Night 6 is 23 hours 56 minutes and 4.090564998291567426130528205804652 seconds from January 99998 BC to January 100000 AD. The average length of year in solar for those 199,998 years total is 365.24224037234585308816051123474198 days but the year in 99998 BC was an average of 365.254814 days, which would've make me want to add a double leap year about every 2 centuries but I would want to drop 1 day an average of every 128.87216301745851186588509720993663 years for the whole program.
On Monday, November 8, 1543 AD the length of the sidereal day was less than the average length of the sidereal day. Then on Wednesday, November 10, 1543 AD the length of the sidereal day was more than the average length of the sidereal day. It had changed forward by a decisecond by Tuesday, November 9, 1543 AD from all the average sidereal days from its start time in the program and back a decisecond by Thursday, November 11, 1543 AD which wasn't quite Veteran's Day yet because the Vietnam War hadn't been fought yet. So therefore the length of sidereal day for November 8, 1543 had to be less than 86,164.090564998291567426130528205804652 seconds and the length of sidereal day for November 10, 1543 had to be more than 86,164.090564998291567426130528205804652 seconds. So do you think that inbetween those 3 days the Earth, sped up in rotation, kept a constant rate of rotation for 2 days, and then slowed down on the 3rd day again, and then sped up again on Friday, November 12, 1543? In comparison, the sidereal days are becoming less than 23.9344696013884143242850362578349457366… hours long and that is the average but the last couple of digits are rounded because the time unit on Starry Night couldn't fit all those extra numbers so I think I took the numbers 27 or 2557 and changed them to 3 to be more precise in the average length of the sidereal day. The average length of sidereal day or solar year or even solar days can differ depending on what years your Starry Night Program has because all programs are different and which year it starts from and goes all the way to, calculated out with your own algorithm for defining the average of anything to the best of your capability. Notice because the real dates in 1543 were in the Julian Calendar, October 29, October 30, October 31, November 1 and 2, I knew that the calendar was 10 days off by 1500 so I did everyone a favor and corrected them by 10 days as 10 days would've been dropped anyway by the time I reached the year 1583 onto the 1600's on October 4-15, 1582. So you mayn't need to correct me or anything. Do a comparison and November 8, 9, 10, 11, and 12 aren't really on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, or Friday but are actually on Thursday, Friday, Saturday, Sunday, and Monday in the Julian Calendar which it uses up until October 15, 1582 Julian Day 22,991,161 days approximately. "when forwarded by the same time," oh when I say "when forwarded by the same time," I mean forwarded by the same amount of time. The questions don't let me insert enough characters to express myself clearly. Yes, astronomers! Time to go do some more investigating. When I forward the Starry Night 6 program whenever by the same amount of clock time, more sidereal time passes if it's in the future, 1 sidereal day passes exactly if it's at the midpoint where everything is its average length from beginning to end and if I'm the past, less sidereal time passes. But how can that be if the days were faster in the past and the days will be slower in the future? Is it because that the years were slower in the past while the days were faster and the years will be faster in the future when the days will be slower? Is that why they're reverse like that? I'm puzzled and I want to know more. Fri
day, October 28, 1408 AD to Friday, November 12, 1543 AD was the midpoint, the time when the length of the sidereal day in my area precise to within 1 decisecond, was the same length as the average length of the sidereal day. Notice that the calendar was 9 days off in the 1400's and 10 days off in the 1500's so it really says Friday, October 19, 1408 AD. October 28, 1408 in the Julian Calendar was actually on Sunday which was November 6 in the Gregorian Calendar.
By the way, Max is a smart guy. He figured this out all by himself without the help from other people or their opinions and composed of mostly correct grammar and has a good observational theory. These are not part of THOSE details but to THESE question details.
I haven't yet to prove anything. In 99998 BC the sidereal day was 23.93447 hours and now it's 23.93446 hours. So as you can see if the sidereal day is getting longer, how is it decreasing in clock hours?
Your stories don't seem to add up. The average length of the sidereal day on Starry Night 6 is 23 hours 56 minutes and 4.090564998291567426130528205804652 seconds from January 99998 BC to January 100000 AD. The average length of year in solar for those 199,998 years total is 365.24224037234585308816051123474198 days but the year in 99998 BC was an average of 365.254814 days, which would've make me want to add a double leap year about every 2 centuries but I would want to drop 1 day an average of every 128.87216301745851186588509720993663 years for the whole program.
On Monday, November 8, 1543 AD the length of the sidereal day was less than the average length of the sidereal day. Then on Wednesday, November 10, 1543 AD the length of the sidereal day was more than the average length of the sidereal day. It had changed forward by a decisecond by Tuesday, November 9, 1543 AD from all the average sidereal days from its start time in the program and back a decisecond by Thursday, November 11, 1543 AD which wasn't quite Veteran's Day yet because the Vietnam War hadn't been fought yet. So therefore the length of sidereal day for November 8, 1543 had to be less than 86,164.090564998291567426130528205804652 seconds and the length of sidereal day for November 10, 1543 had to be more than 86,164.090564998291567426130528205804652 seconds. So do you think that inbetween those 3 days the Earth, sped up in rotation, kept a constant rate of rotation for 2 days, and then slowed down on the 3rd day again, and then sped up again on Friday, November 12, 1543? In comparison, the sidereal days are becoming less than 23.9344696013884143242850362578349457366… hours long and that is the average but the last couple of digits are rounded because the time unit on Starry Night couldn't fit all those extra numbers so I think I took the numbers 27 or 2557 and changed them to 3 to be more precise in the average length of the sidereal day. The average length of sidereal day or solar year or even solar days can differ depending on what years your Starry Night Program has because all programs are different and which year it starts from and goes all the way to, calculated out with your own algorithm for defining the average of anything to the best of your capability. Notice because the real dates in 1543 were in the Julian Calendar, October 29, October 30, October 31, November 1 and 2, I knew that the calendar was 10 days off by 1500 so I did everyone a favor and corrected them by 10 days as 10 days would've been dropped anyway by the time I reached the year 1583 onto the 1600's on October 4-15, 1582. So you mayn't need to correct me or anything. Do a comparison and November 8, 9, 10, 11, and 12 aren't really on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, or Friday but are actually on Thursday, Friday, Saturday, Sunday, and Monday in the Julian Calendar which it uses up until October 15, 1582 Julian Day 22,991,161 days approximately. "when forwarded by the same time," oh when I say "when forwarded by the same time," I mean forwarded by the same amount of time. The questions don't let me insert enough characters to express myself clearly. Yes, astronomers! Time to go do some more investigating. When I forward the Starry Night 6 program whenever by the same amount of clock time, more sidereal time passes if it's in the future, 1 sidereal day passes exactly if it's at the midpoint where everything is its average length from beginning to end and if I'm the past, less sidereal time passes. But how can that be if the days were faster in the past and the days will be slower in the future? Is it because that the years were slower in the past while the days were faster and the years will be faster in the future when the days will be slower? Is that why they're reverse like that? I'm puzzled and I want to know more. Fri
day, October 28, 1408 AD to Friday, November 12, 1543 AD was the midpoint, the time when the length of the sidereal day in my area precise to within 1 decisecond, was the same length as the average length of the sidereal day. Notice that the calendar was 9 days off in the 1400's and 10 days off in the 1500's so it really says Friday, October 19, 1408 AD. October 28, 1408 in the Julian Calendar was actually on Sunday which was November 6 in the Gregorian Calendar.
By the way, Max is a smart guy. He figured this out all by himself without the help from other people or their opinions and composed of mostly correct grammar and has a good observational theory. These are not part of THOSE details but to THESE question details.