weiss@gondor.UUCP (Michael Weiss) (01/31/85)
*** REPLACE THIS moose WITH YOUR mother-in-law! ***
Subject: Dumb trivia because I am bored.
1) Where did the California gold rush start and in what year?
I believe, and most of the answers backed me up, that it
started in 1848 in Sutter's Mill, New Jersey.
Er...California.
2) How many calanders do you need to have a 'perpetual' calander?
(Ie: For all eternity you would need no more than X calanders
to represent whatever year you may be in.)
14. A month can start on any of seven days, and double that
to account for leap years. (One person said 28. 28??)
3) What were the first words ever spoken on a telephone
(exactly) and who said them?
Again, most people agreed with me that the phrase was,
"Watson, come here. I need you." Said by A. G. Bell.
Not 'want' as some thought.
4) (For psychics only:) ?
42.
Ok! That was fun. I see this node is really getting trivial.
--
-Michael "on the the Twilight Node" Weiss ...!psuvax1!gondor!weiss
- The opinions expressed herein are those of my superiors,
and are not necessarily shared by myself.rs55611@ihuxk.UUCP (Robert E. Schleicher) (02/04/85)
> *** REPLACE THIS moose WITH YOUR mother-in-law! *** > > Subject: Dumb trivia because I am bored. > > 1) Where did the California gold rush start and in what year? > > I believe, and most of the answers backed me up, that it > started in 1848 in Sutter's Mill, New Jersey. > Er...California. > > 2) How many calanders do you need to have a 'perpetual' calander? > (Ie: For all eternity you would need no more than X calanders > to represent whatever year you may be in.) > > 14. A month can start on any of seven days, and double that > to account for leap years. (One person said 28. 28??) Is it possible that there is something like a "super leap-year" that comes once every couple of centuries, with an extra day (in addition to the leap day - Feb. 29). I seem to recall the need for additional correction that is provided by adding a day every couple of hundred years (maybe even every 1000 years). I also seem to recall, but this part is much fuzzier, that this extra day wouldn't be part of any month, but would be put between Dec. 31 and Jan. 1. Does anyone else remember anything like this, or was I just having a dream about strange, mystical calendars? > > 3) What were the first words ever spoken on a telephone > (exactly) and who said them? > > Again, most people agreed with me that the phrase was, > "Watson, come here. I need you." Said by A. G. Bell. > Not 'want' as some thought. > > 4) (For psychics only:) ? > > 42. > > Ok! That was fun. I see this node is really getting trivial. > -- > -Michael "on the the Twilight Node" Weiss ...!psuvax1!gondor!weiss > > - The opinions expressed herein are those of my superiors, > and are not necessarily shared by myself. Bob Schleicher ihuxk!rs55611 *** REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR MESSAGE ***
myeksie@uokvax.UUCP (02/07/85)
Aaaaah, I missed the fourth question. I thought it was 3 pi (at least I was close).
gino@sdchema.UUCP (Eugene G. Youngerman) (02/07/85)
>Is it possible that there is something like a "super leap-year" that comes >once every couple of centuries, with an extra day (in addition to the leap >day - Feb. 29). I seem to recall the need for additional correction >that is provided by adding a day every couple of hundred years (maybe even >every 1000 years). I also seem to recall, but this part is much fuzzier, >that this extra day wouldn't be part of any month, but would be put between >Dec. 31 and Jan. 1. Does anyone else remember anything like this, or was >I just having a dream about strange, mystical calendars? > > As I recall, there is an inherent (negative error) of about 3 days every 400 years. This is solved by NOT having leap years in years that end in "00", unless the year is divisible (sp?) by 400. Thus there is a leap year in 2000, but not in 1700, 1800, 1900, or 2100. The errors past this point are so small that they just add or subtract the minutes (or seconds) between years. I am GINO!
marcus@reed.UUCP (Marc Burns) (02/12/85)
In article <874@ihuxk.UUCP> rs55611@ihuxk.UUCP (Robert E. Schleicher) writes: >> *** REPLACE THIS moose WITH YOUR mother-in-law! *** >> >> 2) How many calanders do you need to have a 'perpetual' calander? >> (Ie: For all eternity you would need no more than X calanders >> to represent whatever year you may be in.) >> >> 14. A month can start on any of seven days, and double that >> to account for leap years. (One person said 28. 28??) > >Is it possible that there is something like a "super leap-year" that comes >once every couple of centuries, with an extra day (in addition to the leap >day - Feb. 29). I seem to recall the need for additional correction >that is provided by adding a day every couple of hundred years (maybe even >every 1000 years). I also seem to recall, but this part is much fuzzier, >that this extra day wouldn't be part of any month, but would be put between >Dec. 31 and Jan. 1. Does anyone else remember anything like this, or was >I just having a dream about strange, mystical calendars? > Perhaps what you were thinking of when you referred to the "super-leap year" was the fact that every year number that is divisible by 400 is *not* a leap year. i.e. when we reach the high and hallowed year 2000, there will not be a Feb. 29. "SCIENCE DOES NOT REMOVE THE TERROR OF THE GODS"
adm@cbneb.UUCP (02/14/85)
/***** cbnap:net.games.triv / sdchema!gino / 5:35 pm Feb 11, 1985 */ >Is it possible that there is something like a "super leap-year" that comes > > >> As I recall, there is an inherent (negative error) of about 3 days every >> 400 years. This is solved by NOT having leap years in years that end >> in "00", unless the year is divisible (sp?) by 400. Thus there is >> a leap year in 2000, but not in 1700, 1800, 1900, or 2100. The errors >> past this point are so small that they just add or subtract the >> minutes (or seconds) between years. Also I believe the Nat. Bur. of Standards gives us leap seconds on a day in June. (Does anyone know the details?) /* ---------- */
ecl@ahuta.UUCP (e.leeper) (02/14/85)
REFERENCES: <1595@gondor.UUCP> <874@ihuxk.UUCP>, <922@reed.UUCP>
2000 *is* a leap year.
Period.
(End of discussion? Please?)
Evelyn C. Leeper
...{ihnp4, houxm, hocsj}!ahuta!eclandersa@kuling.UUCP (Anders Andersson) (02/15/85)
> As I recall, there is an inherent (negative error) of about 3 days every > 400 years. This is solved by NOT having leap years in years that end > in "00", unless the year is divisible (sp?) by 400. Thus there is > a leap year in 2000, but not in 1700, 1800, 1900, or 2100. The errors > past this point are so small that they just add or subtract the > minutes (or seconds) between years. The method of excluding exactly three years from being leap years within a period of 400 years will result in a mean value of 365.2425 days per year, quite close to the length of the tropical year, 365.2422 days. The error will not be more than 1 day in about 3000 years, which probably seemed small enough to Pope Gregorius' mathematicians (and does to me too). However, this error may NOT be corrected by adding or subtracting seconds; some day in the future our descendants will have to exclude yet another year from being a leap year. The reason to manipulate with seconds is that the Earth doesn't really care about Homo Sapiens' idea of how long a second should be when rotating around her axis, and that's a completely different problem. /Dolphin