Re: Military time (whoops!)

["Robert Holmgren" holmgren@xxxxxxxx]

** Reply to message from "Brian Henderson"  on Sat, 17
Jun 2006 08:56:59 -0700


> Robert that can't be correct

But it is correct. See, e.g.:
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/24-hour_clock
Wiki underscores repeatedly that "2400" is no more than a "convenience" to
indicate the end of the current day, in some current-day contexts such as
timetables. The digital clock runs from 0 to 23 hours.

> for the same reason that the 21st century
> didn't start in the year 2000

For a completely different reason, namely that the Gregorian calendar has no
year zero. You'll have to ask Pope Gregory the reason for that... Gregorians
are the only ones who think that way. Scientists and clairvoyants don't.
Neither do clockmakers.

> I don't understand the difference in the number of seconds in 00:00:01
> to 24:00:00, and 00:00:00 to 23:59:59.

There's no difference mathematically -- both spans contain 86399 seconds; but
counting starts at zero, not one, as I believe I pointed out initially. To get
86400 seconds, you count from 00:00:00 *to* 00:00:00 (not *to* 23:59:00).

So do I get my villa in Vietnam, or not?

-----------------------------
Robert Holmgren
holmgren@xxxxxxxx
-----------------------------