I have calculated corrections to the calendar incorporating slowing of the earth's rotation.

Using the figures for current days/year of 365.242199 and annual rotational slowing of 0.008812 seconds/year/year, I have calculated what I believe to be perhaps the best divisibility corrections to the calendar. I divided time after the current year 1 into seven intervals, numbered 0-6. each begins with the year 1. At each expiration, the values of (observable days/year minus cumulative calendar days/year) are given as follows:

0: -0.0000245
1: 0.0000799
2: 0.0000669
3: -0.0000970
4: -0.0000119
5: 0.0000409
6: -0.0000180

The sum of squares is 2.3007 e -8

I am still asking for someone to buy my figures at the asking price of $7,000,000,000 (make me a counter offer.) Included in that price is calculation by my heirs of all corrections up to the time at which the earth will make one rotation every year, The same side facing the sun constantly, like the moon does around the earth. presumably that will be a stable condition and not change for the remainder of the life of the sun. If slowing does not change, the earth will face one side to the sun always after some 3.5 billion years. The expected lifetime of the sun is 5 billion years.

considering my readers as clients

I am concerned that I have created too much of a memory-driven product here. I need to consider my readers as clients. what real value have I to offer here? The more powerful an idea, the greater the fallout. There should be ramifications that reach into tiny details. Otherwise, its just daydreaming.

But why is there no response to the matter of planning ahead for the calendar? Is it that people don't follow the math? Or is it that they trust "the authorities" to make the right decisions without a public debate? It was "the authorities" at Time Magazine and Encyclopedia Britannica who advanced a common year in 4000, a measure that wouldn't work if the earth's rotation were not slowing, and won't work considering that the earth really is slowing. Who else is willing to think about this? I found this link to a discussion, but it leaves me still wanting someone to talk about the pattern of alternating leap and common years at certain divisibilities as the way to gradually close in on a better fit, With slowing rotation the fly in the ointment that ends the system at four divisibilities. the language they use officially about the 100 and 400 year divisibilities is not instructive about this alternation effect, and leads to much confusion in the minds of the public.

divisions of time into administrative regimes

Given a different set of divisibility corrections, a new administration regime will need to identify its range of years as a different administration. This argues in favor of rezeroing. changing divisibility corrections is not a minor adjustment and continuing year count across the divide is misleading. The more regimes, the more need to identify them all and continuous years is not good for this.

The fact that in early regimes the difference is encountered in late divisibility corrections is not a geneal situation since in later regimes the first divisibility correction will be different. The feeling of continuity is not good to endorse. this supports rezeroing.

A year zero cannot be calculated as leap or common. Its omission may have been purposeful. In any case its omission in this type of system is correct, which argues against any conclusion that the calendar orders the real number line.

implications of a failing calendar system

The roman system of corrections to an integral day year leads to a series of embedded, increasingly long, lulls of uniform rates of inaccuracy, a series which ends, due to a slowing earth rotation, at four.

It was military success that enabled the adoption of this system, and so its only real use is militarily achieved unification of the peoples.

The temporary nature of the system suits a temporary time of military developments and political consolidations. It has agricultural use only in service to those ends. Consequently, the world after the calendar expires will be riddled with questions of what it has produced that will fail to find anyone willing to answer. The calendar puts everyone in one ship.

Everyone can see the calendar losing accuracy. Who among them has seen the math of adding a slowing earth rotation?

On the first, no one in authority but me has done us all the service of calculating and publishing it. Why have i done it? Because i am a failure within the calendar and built outside it, trusting in my personal validity rather than judgments of the mentally ill.

As daylight savings time shows, homo sapiens needs a calendar to directly show process and cannot itself provide modifications to make it work. So one would expect the same for integral days per year, only there is no modification that will work beyond so many years.

What agreements are homo sapiens forming to move beyond this calendar? After so many years it will fail. What agreements are larger than those made in the calendar? God is strictly a calendar kind of guy. I suggest people start asking this type of question or they will lose more and more options as time progresses.

The slowing of the earth's rotation will lead to a break in the leap year calendar system.

I have a figure for the measured slowing of the earth's rotation. It is 0.008812 seconds per year per year.

Every year later that a given correction divisibility year occurs, leap year for odd corrections, common year for even corrections, the size of the correction is smaller. therefore, only one correction can be made in the future given slowing. another correction would contend with even greater accumulated slowing, which would require an earlier time of correction to produce a larger correction, contradicting the later correction time. so such a correction is mathematically impossible, and therefore physically impossible, given this calendar system, as well.

I have calculated modified fits, accounting for slowing, and find that one of the divisibility years--divisible by all previous divisibility years and an integral factor of the last previous one--is both a better fit than the previous corrections combined and better than those to either side of it.

You can either pay me to publish that year, do the calculation yourself, or find someone able to do it cheaper and with less bureaucracy than me.

The year i have calculated is the last possible correction under the current calendar system and after that year fit of the calendar will continue to worsen indefinitely, because slowing makes further corrections impossible, no matter how good the fit is in any one year.

My suggestion that i had calculated corrections good beyond the lifetime of the sun was made without considering slowing and i had thought that the mathematics would permit indefintie better fit corrections provided the slowing was gradual enough. that was before i looked at slowing more carefully, and now it is clear my optimistic view was in error.

Instead, it appears that the calendar's method of reconciling the length of the year with the length of the day is practical only for a limited interval of time. To cover a more or less indefinte interval of time, successive rezeroing of the years, and acceptance of a division of time into disparate administrative units, is the only solution.

As we have seen with the loss of the roman empire but the continuation of its julian calendar, with modifications, the calendar's administration is likely to outlive any given national government, including the united states.

I have calculated calendar corrections through the lifetime of the sun. they are for sale.

The julian calendar provides one divisibility correction to the 365 day year, at divisibility by 4 in years away from the nonexistent year zero. The gregorian calendar provides three divisibility corrections, at divisibility by 4, 100, and 400. My 2009 Time/Britannica almanac offers a suggestion that a correction be made at divisibility by 4000. I find this to be an unwise suggestion, as it is not a step past the modern calculation for days/year of 365.242199 from the previous divisibility correction, Thus there is no subsequent correction that will improve fit. Each correction of the gregorian calendar, throws the cumulative correction to the other side of the modern value from the previous correction, getting closer to the modern value each time. by failing to cross over like that, the 4000 year correction creates a situation where the next, necessarily alternating type of correction (alternating between leap or deny leap), would worsen the cumulative fit--an absurd suggestion.

I have calculated 9 divisibility corrections past the 3 of the gregorian calendar which each improve fit, achieving a days/year value of 365.24219900000. In the event science refines its calculation of days/year I can recalculate my divisibilty corrections and replace the zeroes with whatever the refined figures are. I am not going to divulge my corrections unless homo sapiens civilization pays me $7 billion.

You laugh? You homo sapiens have a 4000 year correction on tap that effectively ends the usefulness of the calendar after 20,000 years. My corrections will reach five zeroes past the modern value and this means I can adapt the calendar beyond the expected lifetime of the sun, or 5 billion years.

If you don't like my price, make me a counter offer. I'm a businessman. Your efforts without me are leading to a dead end, so who is going to get five zeroes past the modern value, recalculable to suit, for cheaper and with less bureaucracy? Our attorneys would draw up an escrow agreement naming someone authoritative, such as the national institute of standards and technology, to validate that the corrections produce the claimed fit to the measured value of days/year.

I will advise you that my corrections include a common year in 2000 instead of the gregorian leap there. I would assert that this is a small price to pay for getting coverage for the expected lifetime of the sun.