▲ 469 ▼ Seriously like what is he going to do with all that money? (thelemmy.club) submitted 2 months ago by laurenceOfSuburbia@lemmy.world to c/memes@lemmy.world 77 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] wetsoggybread@lemmy.world 30 points 2 months ago (1 child) Its only been 738,715 days since 1/1/0001 so this checks permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] VonReposti@feddit.dk 5 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (3 children) My calculations make it 739,802 Baseline: 2025 * 365 = 739,125 Leap years: Floor(2025 / 4) = 506 - floor(2025 / 100) = 486 + floor(2025 / 400) = 491 (every 4th year except every 100th year with the exception of every 400th year) 1st of Jan 2026 to 5th of July 2026: 186 Total: 739,125 + 491 + 186 = 739,802 permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 5 points 2 months ago (1 child) Why not just do 2025×365.2425 + 186? Also note: the Gregorian calendar was not in use yet at the start of this, so that might throw off all your calculations permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] VonReposti@feddit.dk 2 points 2 months ago (1 child) I wanted to show the full calculation, but that one works too. And yes, you could do some more math to account for the 10 day drift the Julian calendar introduced but historians mostly use the proleptic Gregorian calendar which removes this for ease of use to better count orbits. If you want the actual sunrises since 1/1/0001 it should be enough to just add back 10 days. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 1 point 2 months ago (1 child) Wait so you're telling me 2000 was not a leap year? But 2200 will be? I was too young to really pay attention that year. That's interesting about the proleptic calendar and stuff. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] VonReposti@feddit.dk 3 points 2 months ago (1 child) 2000 is divisible by 400 so it is a leap year. It goes "divisible by 4" is a leap year, "divisible by 100" not a leap year, "divisible by 400" the exception to the exception so this is a leap year too. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 1 point 2 months ago Oh fuck, I'm clearly too tired to do math in my head right now... permalink fedilink source parent [–] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 months ago (1 child) Did you account for the switch from the Julian Calendar to the Gregorian Calendar? Don't worry if you didn't, this has tripped up a number of apocalyptic religious cults as well, they had to rewrite their time tables to Doomsday when somebody pointed it out to them. But yeah, basically, 10 days got wiped out of conceptual existence in the uh, great time refactor of 1582. ... and more confusingly, it wasn't like, globally adopted at the same time, so, sometimes, in some places, adoption resulted in the nullification of 11, 12, or 13 days. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] VonReposti@feddit.dk 2 points 2 months ago (1 child) No, I used the proleptic Gregorian calendar, so if you want to count sunrises you can just add 10 days. Historians use it for simplicity and accept the drift. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 months ago Excellent! If Dr Who ever randomly abducts you, you'll be slightly better suited for the experiencd than most! permalink fedilink source parent [–] davidgro@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago (1 child) Why June? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] lavacake1111@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago (1 child) Typo. That's probably July. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] VonReposti@feddit.dk 1 point 2 months ago Fixed, it was a typo permalink fedilink source parent
[–] VonReposti@feddit.dk 5 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (3 children) My calculations make it 739,802 Baseline: 2025 * 365 = 739,125 Leap years: Floor(2025 / 4) = 506 - floor(2025 / 100) = 486 + floor(2025 / 400) = 491 (every 4th year except every 100th year with the exception of every 400th year) 1st of Jan 2026 to 5th of July 2026: 186 Total: 739,125 + 491 + 186 = 739,802 permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 5 points 2 months ago (1 child) Why not just do 2025×365.2425 + 186? Also note: the Gregorian calendar was not in use yet at the start of this, so that might throw off all your calculations permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] VonReposti@feddit.dk 2 points 2 months ago (1 child) I wanted to show the full calculation, but that one works too. And yes, you could do some more math to account for the 10 day drift the Julian calendar introduced but historians mostly use the proleptic Gregorian calendar which removes this for ease of use to better count orbits. If you want the actual sunrises since 1/1/0001 it should be enough to just add back 10 days. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 1 point 2 months ago (1 child) Wait so you're telling me 2000 was not a leap year? But 2200 will be? I was too young to really pay attention that year. That's interesting about the proleptic calendar and stuff. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] VonReposti@feddit.dk 3 points 2 months ago (1 child) 2000 is divisible by 400 so it is a leap year. It goes "divisible by 4" is a leap year, "divisible by 100" not a leap year, "divisible by 400" the exception to the exception so this is a leap year too. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 1 point 2 months ago Oh fuck, I'm clearly too tired to do math in my head right now... permalink fedilink source parent [–] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 months ago (1 child) Did you account for the switch from the Julian Calendar to the Gregorian Calendar? Don't worry if you didn't, this has tripped up a number of apocalyptic religious cults as well, they had to rewrite their time tables to Doomsday when somebody pointed it out to them. But yeah, basically, 10 days got wiped out of conceptual existence in the uh, great time refactor of 1582. ... and more confusingly, it wasn't like, globally adopted at the same time, so, sometimes, in some places, adoption resulted in the nullification of 11, 12, or 13 days. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] VonReposti@feddit.dk 2 points 2 months ago (1 child) No, I used the proleptic Gregorian calendar, so if you want to count sunrises you can just add 10 days. Historians use it for simplicity and accept the drift. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 months ago Excellent! If Dr Who ever randomly abducts you, you'll be slightly better suited for the experiencd than most! permalink fedilink source parent [–] davidgro@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago (1 child) Why June? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] lavacake1111@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago (1 child) Typo. That's probably July. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] VonReposti@feddit.dk 1 point 2 months ago Fixed, it was a typo permalink fedilink source parent
[–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 5 points 2 months ago (1 child) Why not just do 2025×365.2425 + 186? Also note: the Gregorian calendar was not in use yet at the start of this, so that might throw off all your calculations permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] VonReposti@feddit.dk 2 points 2 months ago (1 child) I wanted to show the full calculation, but that one works too. And yes, you could do some more math to account for the 10 day drift the Julian calendar introduced but historians mostly use the proleptic Gregorian calendar which removes this for ease of use to better count orbits. If you want the actual sunrises since 1/1/0001 it should be enough to just add back 10 days. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 1 point 2 months ago (1 child) Wait so you're telling me 2000 was not a leap year? But 2200 will be? I was too young to really pay attention that year. That's interesting about the proleptic calendar and stuff. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] VonReposti@feddit.dk 3 points 2 months ago (1 child) 2000 is divisible by 400 so it is a leap year. It goes "divisible by 4" is a leap year, "divisible by 100" not a leap year, "divisible by 400" the exception to the exception so this is a leap year too. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 1 point 2 months ago Oh fuck, I'm clearly too tired to do math in my head right now... permalink fedilink source parent
[–] VonReposti@feddit.dk 2 points 2 months ago (1 child) I wanted to show the full calculation, but that one works too. And yes, you could do some more math to account for the 10 day drift the Julian calendar introduced but historians mostly use the proleptic Gregorian calendar which removes this for ease of use to better count orbits. If you want the actual sunrises since 1/1/0001 it should be enough to just add back 10 days. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 1 point 2 months ago (1 child) Wait so you're telling me 2000 was not a leap year? But 2200 will be? I was too young to really pay attention that year. That's interesting about the proleptic calendar and stuff. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] VonReposti@feddit.dk 3 points 2 months ago (1 child) 2000 is divisible by 400 so it is a leap year. It goes "divisible by 4" is a leap year, "divisible by 100" not a leap year, "divisible by 400" the exception to the exception so this is a leap year too. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 1 point 2 months ago Oh fuck, I'm clearly too tired to do math in my head right now... permalink fedilink source parent
[–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 1 point 2 months ago (1 child) Wait so you're telling me 2000 was not a leap year? But 2200 will be? I was too young to really pay attention that year. That's interesting about the proleptic calendar and stuff. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] VonReposti@feddit.dk 3 points 2 months ago (1 child) 2000 is divisible by 400 so it is a leap year. It goes "divisible by 4" is a leap year, "divisible by 100" not a leap year, "divisible by 400" the exception to the exception so this is a leap year too. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 1 point 2 months ago Oh fuck, I'm clearly too tired to do math in my head right now... permalink fedilink source parent
[–] VonReposti@feddit.dk 3 points 2 months ago (1 child) 2000 is divisible by 400 so it is a leap year. It goes "divisible by 4" is a leap year, "divisible by 100" not a leap year, "divisible by 400" the exception to the exception so this is a leap year too. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 1 point 2 months ago Oh fuck, I'm clearly too tired to do math in my head right now... permalink fedilink source parent
[–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 1 point 2 months ago Oh fuck, I'm clearly too tired to do math in my head right now... permalink fedilink source parent
[–] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 months ago (1 child) Did you account for the switch from the Julian Calendar to the Gregorian Calendar? Don't worry if you didn't, this has tripped up a number of apocalyptic religious cults as well, they had to rewrite their time tables to Doomsday when somebody pointed it out to them. But yeah, basically, 10 days got wiped out of conceptual existence in the uh, great time refactor of 1582. ... and more confusingly, it wasn't like, globally adopted at the same time, so, sometimes, in some places, adoption resulted in the nullification of 11, 12, or 13 days. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] VonReposti@feddit.dk 2 points 2 months ago (1 child) No, I used the proleptic Gregorian calendar, so if you want to count sunrises you can just add 10 days. Historians use it for simplicity and accept the drift. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 months ago Excellent! If Dr Who ever randomly abducts you, you'll be slightly better suited for the experiencd than most! permalink fedilink source parent
[–] VonReposti@feddit.dk 2 points 2 months ago (1 child) No, I used the proleptic Gregorian calendar, so if you want to count sunrises you can just add 10 days. Historians use it for simplicity and accept the drift. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 months ago Excellent! If Dr Who ever randomly abducts you, you'll be slightly better suited for the experiencd than most! permalink fedilink source parent
[–] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 months ago Excellent! If Dr Who ever randomly abducts you, you'll be slightly better suited for the experiencd than most! permalink fedilink source parent
[–] davidgro@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago (1 child) Why June? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] lavacake1111@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago (1 child) Typo. That's probably July. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] VonReposti@feddit.dk 1 point 2 months ago Fixed, it was a typo permalink fedilink source parent
[–] lavacake1111@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago (1 child) Typo. That's probably July. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] VonReposti@feddit.dk 1 point 2 months ago Fixed, it was a typo permalink fedilink source parent
