flat assembler
Message board for the users of flat assembler.

Index > OS Construction > Seconds To Time

Goto page Previous  1, 2

What resolution should the time ticks be?
<1µs
12%
 12%  [ 1 ]
1µs
0%
 0%  [ 0 ]
10µs
0%
 0%  [ 0 ]
100µs
0%
 0%  [ 0 ]
1ms
50%
 50%  [ 4 ]
10ms
12%
 12%  [ 1 ]
100ms
12%
 12%  [ 1 ]
1s
12%
 12%  [ 1 ]
>1s
0%
 0%  [ 0 ]
Total Votes : 8

Author
Thread Post new topic Reply to topic
Adam Kachwalla



Joined: 01 Apr 2006
Posts: 150
Adam Kachwalla
I'm not exactly sure about converting seconds to days (leap seconds?)
I know that 1 day is 86 400 seconds.
Post 27 Sep 2006, 21:13
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
smiddy



Joined: 31 Oct 2004
Posts: 559
smiddy
From what I've read, the number of leap seconds is not as cyclic and essentially fixes variations is earths speed around the sun. The latest cycle for a leaps seconds has be quite a while. If I understood what I was reading correctly, it appears that we may have to start subtracting seconds from days too. That all being said, I think you are safe using the stardard of 60^2 * 24 for a day, as long as you're only using your dates as a comparison and are not in need of specific precision on locating planets during a certain time frame.
Post 28 Sep 2006, 01:34
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Niels



Joined: 17 Sep 2006
Posts: 255
Niels
@Adam: Time today is based on 1 statistic cyclus. Since there is more than 1 cycle and not equal in turn, it could take some time before anyone can really share you the correct answer. Smile
The division of a second is done with atoms, as I understood it. Meaning that they made an agreement, on how much turns an atom has in 1 second. This of course is a very simplistic and amateurisch explanation. Sad
Post 28 Sep 2006, 10:58
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Niels



Joined: 17 Sep 2006
Posts: 255
Niels
@Adam: Since the exact time of 'a today' could not be exactly said in seconds and is weekly too much trouble is to adjust for all, we have the leapyear. Since the leapyear is also incorrect, we know the leapseconds, to keep the things that weren't right on timetrack. Smile
Post 28 Sep 2006, 11:12
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Niels



Joined: 17 Sep 2006
Posts: 255
Niels
@Adam: Most of the time, us humans have more than enough with; wayback, yesterday, today, tomorrow and wayforward. Smile
Post 28 Sep 2006, 11:14
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Niels



Joined: 17 Sep 2006
Posts: 255
Niels
@Adam: In the Holy Scripture there is a story, were GOD turns the our planet back in a former position 'earlier' in time, so maybe we get some Holy Leaphours too. Smile
Post 28 Sep 2006, 11:22
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
shoorick



Joined: 25 Feb 2005
Posts: 1608
Location: Ukraine
shoorick
it is an old dialog of two drug-eaters:
- what time now?
- friday...
- yeah... autumn will soon...
Smile
Post 28 Sep 2006, 11:47
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
Niels



Joined: 17 Sep 2006
Posts: 255
Niels
@shoorick: Beavis and Butthead? Smile
Post 28 Sep 2006, 12:35
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Niels



Joined: 17 Sep 2006
Posts: 255
Niels
@Adam: "I rather have a tomato-fight over this than an atom-war, since both ways don't make right switch."
Post 28 Sep 2006, 12:49
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
smiddy



Joined: 31 Oct 2004
Posts: 559
smiddy
@Niels, atomic clocks are only accurate within your frame of reference. Orbiting atomic clocks appear to move slower than ones on Earth, since they are moving at greater magnitudes of speed in comparison to the ones stationary on Earth.
Post 28 Sep 2006, 16:34
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Niels



Joined: 17 Sep 2006
Posts: 255
Niels
@smiddy: I didn't said that atomic-clocks were accurate and I know they are not absolute accurate. Smile
Post 28 Sep 2006, 17:29
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
smiddy



Joined: 31 Oct 2004
Posts: 559
smiddy
Niels, I was implying that they are relatively accurate given thier own frame, but from an observers frame moving at differing speeds at orders of magnitude different they are not.
Post 28 Sep 2006, 21:25
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Niels



Joined: 17 Sep 2006
Posts: 255
Niels
@YONG, To be honest with you, my faith differs from my logical opinion, which is, prayers are useless and GOD is not souverain nor almighty or is just not good, this also implies that there is no such GOD as the Holy Scripture describes. Of course when things don't change within my life, I take the logical opinion before I die.

ps.
The logical opinion is not based on the visible world.
Post 29 Sep 2006, 14:46
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Niels



Joined: 17 Sep 2006
Posts: 255
Niels
@smiddy, I see you describe my earlier post with your latest.
Post 29 Sep 2006, 15:14
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Niels



Joined: 17 Sep 2006
Posts: 255
Niels
@YONG, Maybe GOD's name is Ab, and is that name related to the use of power. Smile
Post 29 Sep 2006, 15:36
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
YONG



Joined: 16 Mar 2005
Posts: 8000
Location: 22° 15' N | 114° 10' E
YONG
Niels wrote:
@YONG, To be honest with you, my faith differs from my logical opinion, which is, prayers are useless and GOD is not souverain nor almighty or is just not good, this also implies that there is no such GOD as the Holy Scripture describes. Of course when things don't change within my life, I take the logical opinion before I die.

ps.
The logical opinion is not based on the visible world.


@Niels: As I mentioned earlier, I respect your point of view. PERIOD. Smile

YONG
Post 30 Sep 2006, 06:53
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
Niels



Joined: 17 Sep 2006
Posts: 255
Niels
@Adam, I came across this one:

http://www.time.gov/exhibits.html
Post 30 Sep 2006, 14:09
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Niels



Joined: 17 Sep 2006
Posts: 255
Niels
@YONG, Ok. I just hate GOD's that can tumble a mount, only when it's not needed.
Post 30 Sep 2006, 15:07
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Niels



Joined: 17 Sep 2006
Posts: 255
Niels
@YONG, I just wanted to share this; It seems to me that the original system has been taken over by emulators, scripts, etc. Sad LO
Post 30 Sep 2006, 15:45
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:
Post new topic Reply to topic

Jump to:  
Goto page Previous  1, 2

< Last Thread | Next Thread >
Forum Rules:
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Copyright © 1999-2020, Tomasz Grysztar. Also on GitHub, YouTube, Twitter.

Website powered by rwasa.