Re: When was Gregorian calendar right?

"Leonard Erickson" <shadow@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
news:5cal14t7g3hr4iclb4s0bt7cs5btmahjd0@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Thu, 1 May 2008 17:53:03 +0100, "Mike Dworetsky"
> <platinum198@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>>Of course we also have a cumulative error in the sense that the actual
>>period length of a tropical year is 365.2422 days (to 4 decimals) so the
>>Gregorian calendar itself will gradually need some reforms; a leap year 
>>will
>>have to be omitted, perhaps the year 4000.  I imagine the Catholic
Church
>>will give thought to this in about 1700 years or so. (Could be an
>>interesting SciFi story theme?).  The error accumulated is about 1 day 
>>every
>>3300 years rather than 4000 years, so in the very far future a further
>>reform might be needed.
>
> The Orthodox churches already havre an adjustment in place.
>
> http://www.tondering.dk/claus/cal/node3.html#SECTION00322000000000000000
>
> So in 2800, there will be a difference between them and the Gregorian
> calendar.
>

Assuming they remember...and not every Eastern Orthodox Church has adopted

this, yet.

Also, their proposal makes 1600 a non-leap year, while it is a leap year
in 
Gregorian.  Presumably their reform is a "henceforward" type of proposal.

It may be nit-picking, but it's **religions** you are fooling around with 
here, so people take these things very seriously.



-- 
Mike Dworetsky

(Remove pants sp*mbl*ck to reply)