Lance to control rbr next.

Callistus Valerius said:

Lance, with his obsession to control everything, will now turn his
attention to rbr, and rule it with an iron fist.

Nope. SuperWanker's ISP won't let him access RBR.

He failed the Basic Intelligence Test.

Jan got it right when they asked him how many Seconds there were in a
year.

He thought for a while and then came up with 31,536,000

But Quick-Witted Mr.Jaune says ``Twelve''

''How'd you figure that out?'' says the ISP man

``Well,'' sez Mr. Jaune, ``There's January Second, February Second.....''

Quoted message said:

Jan got it right when they asked him how many Seconds there were in a
year. He thought for a while and then came up with 31,536,000

Hmmm. I don't think that's right. For example, this year doesn't have that
number of seconds.

Quoted message said:

But Quick-Witted Mr.Jaune says ``Twelve''

''How'd you figure that out?'' says the ISP man

``Well,'' sez Mr. Jaune, ``There's January Second, February

Second.....''

This year does have that many Seconds.

Robert Chung said:

Quoted message said:

Jan got it right when they asked him how many Seconds there were in a
year. He thought for a while and then came up with 31,536,000

Hmmm. I don't think that's right. For example, this year doesn't have that
number of seconds.

Quoted message said:

But Quick-Witted Mr.Jaune says ``Twelve''

''How'd you figure that out?'' says the ISP man

``Well,'' sez Mr. Jaune, ``There's January Second, February

Second.....''

This year does have that many Seconds.

As a matter of fact, if you want to split hairs, the correct answer is
31,558,149 supposing you contemplate a sidereal year

"Callistus Valerius" wrote...

Quoted message said:

Lance, with his obsession to control everything, will now turn his
attention to rbr, and rule it with an iron fist.

We should be so blessed.

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

As a matter of fact, if you want to split hairs, the correct answer is
31,558,149 supposing you contemplate a sidereal year

Better stick to insults Davey, you'd flunk out of exact time school.

Tom Kunich said:

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

As a matter of fact, if you want to split hairs, the correct answer is
31,558,149 supposing you contemplate a sidereal year

Better stick to insults Davey, you'd flunk out of exact time school.

Geez, then please tell me how many days there are in a Sidereal year?

Lessee now, Roger Penrose told me it was 365.25636 as opposed to the
Tropical year which 365.24220 days (Or roughly 20 minutes less)

But all that Jazz is a complete Black Hole to Davey, and Einstein said
it didn't matter at all anyway 'cause it was all Relative and if
you fooled around with it long enuf you'd be sure to meet yourself
coming back then along comes Bohr and says Einstein was fulla [censored] on
the Quantum stuff

🙂

Quoted message said:

Robert Chung said:

Quoted message said:

Jan got it right when they asked him how many Seconds there were in a
year. He thought for a while and then came up with 31,536,000

Hmmm. I don't think that's right. For example, this year doesn't have
that number of seconds.

Quoted message said:

But Quick-Witted Mr.Jaune says ``Twelve''

''How'd you figure that out?'' says the ISP man

``Well,'' sez Mr. Jaune, ``There's January Second, February
Second.....''

This year does have that many Seconds.

As a matter of fact, if you want to split hairs, the correct answer is
31,558,149 supposing you contemplate a sidereal year

I don't think that's right, either. Sidereal years are astronomical years
and, when measured in astronomical years, the length changes.

Robert Chung said:

Quoted message said:

Robert Chung said:

[email hidden] wrote:
>
> Jan got it right when they asked him how many Seconds there were in a
> year. He thought for a while and then came up with 31,536,000

Hmmm. I don't think that's right. For example, this year doesn't have
that number of seconds.

> But Quick-Witted Mr.Jaune says ``Twelve''
>
> ''How'd you figure that out?'' says the ISP man
>
> ``Well,'' sez Mr. Jaune, ``There's January Second, February
> Second.....''

This year does have that many Seconds.

As a matter of fact, if you want to split hairs, the correct answer is
31,558,149 supposing you contemplate a sidereal year

I don't think that's right, either. Sidereal years are astronomical years
and, when measured in astronomical years, the length changes.

It seems like you don't think at all [censored]

The thread started out as a humourous type thing, but you seem to
ew=want to show the World your ignorance by splitting hairs an something
that doesn't matter one Iota in the context

Quoted message said:

It seems like you don't think at all [censored]

The thread started out as a humourous type thing, but you seem to
ew=want to show the World your ignorance by splitting hairs an something
that doesn't matter one Iota in the context

If it's a humorous thing, why are you getting upset?

Robert Chung said:

Quoted message said:

It seems like you don't think at all [censored]

The thread started out as a humourous type thing, but you seem to
ew=want to show the World your ignorance by splitting hairs an something
that doesn't matter one Iota in the context

If it's a humorous thing, why are you getting upset?

Davey aint upset. He just thinks [censored] like you are the lovest form of
Animal life

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Tom Kunich said:

<[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

As a matter of fact, if you want to split hairs, the correct answer is
31,558,149 supposing you contemplate a sidereal year

Better stick to insults Davey, you'd flunk out of exact time school.

Geez, then please tell me how many days there are in a Sidereal year?

Lessee now, Roger Penrose told me it was 365.25636 as opposed to the
Tropical year which 365.24220 days (Or roughly 20 minutes less)

In fact the earth is slowing down each revolution and the clocks have to be
corrected for this all the time. Therefore discussing "exact" length of a
day or of a year in seconds is somewhat inaccurate by definition.

I don't have my charts anymore, but the time variance is significant and
each year it is accelerating.

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Robert Chung said:

Quoted message said:

It seems like you don't think at all [censored]

The thread started out as a humourous type thing, but you seem to
ew=want to show the World your ignorance by splitting hairs an

something

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

that doesn't matter one Iota in the context

If it's a humorous thing, why are you getting upset?

Davey aint upset. He just thinks [censored] like you are the lovest form of
Animal life

Nah, Robert's really a very high form of animal life.

"Tom Kunich" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

In fact the earth is slowing down each revolution and the clocks have to

be

Quoted message said:

corrected for this all the time. Therefore discussing "exact" length of a
day or of a year in seconds is somewhat inaccurate by definition.

I don't have my charts anymore, but the time variance is significant and
each year it is accelerating.

Then why don't I have more time to ride my bike in the evening?

"Carl Sundquist" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Tom Kunich" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

In fact the earth is slowing down each revolution and the clocks have to

be

Quoted message said:

corrected for this all the time. Therefore discussing "exact" length of

a

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

day or of a year in seconds is somewhat inaccurate by definition.

I don't have my charts anymore, but the time variance is significant and
each year it is accelerating.

Then why don't I have more time to ride my bike in the evening?

Because your legs are too short.

"Tom Kunich" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > >

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

In fact the earth is slowing down each revolution and the clocks have

to

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

be

Quoted message said:

corrected for this all the time. Therefore discussing "exact" length

of

Quoted message said:

a

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

day or of a year in seconds is somewhat inaccurate by definition.

I don't have my charts anymore, but the time variance is significant

and

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

each year it is accelerating.

Then why don't I have more time to ride my bike in the evening?

Because your legs are too short.

It can't be that, they reach the ground.

Robert Chung said:

[email hidden] wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

As a matter of fact, if you want to split hairs, the correct answer is
31,558,149 supposing you contemplate a sidereal year

Quoted message said:

I don't think that's right, either. Sidereal years are astronomical years
and, when measured in astronomical years, the length changes.

To most astronomers, a year is pi times 10^7 seconds and that's close
enough for most practical work.

Unless you care deeply about the difference between UTC and mean solar time
and atomic time. Since previous attempts to ignore calendrical differences
have caused significant social dislocations, maybe you should.

Ben
Knows people who care deeply about this stuff
http://www.ucolick.org/~sla/leapsecs/dutc.html

Benjamin Weiner said:

Robert Chung said:

[email hidden] wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

As a matter of fact, if you want to split hairs, the correct answer is
31,558,149 supposing you contemplate a sidereal year

Quoted message said:

I don't think that's right, either. Sidereal years are astronomical
years and, when measured in astronomical years, the length changes.

To most astronomers, a year is pi times 10^7 seconds and that's close
enough for most practical work.

Unless you care deeply about the difference between UTC and mean solar
time and atomic time. Since previous attempts to ignore calendrical
differences have caused significant social dislocations, maybe you
should.

Ben
Knows people who care deeply about this stuff
http://www.ucolick.org/~sla/leapsecs/dutc.html

[censored].

How many Seconds are there in a year?

"Robert Chung" <[email hidden]> wrote ... >

Quoted message said:

How many Seconds are there in a year?

TIOOYK.

Klöden.

Jenko

--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

(Benjamin Weiner) said:

Robert Chung said:

[email hidden] wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

As a matter of fact, if you want to split hairs, the correct answer is
31,558,149 supposing you contemplate a sidereal year

Quoted message said:

I don't think that's right, either. Sidereal years are astronomical years
and, when measured in astronomical years, the length changes.

To most astronomers, a year is pi times 10^7 seconds and that's close
enough for most practical work.

Unless you care deeply about the difference between UTC and mean solar time
and atomic time. Since previous attempts to ignore calendrical differences
have caused significant social dislocations, maybe you should.

Ben
Knows people who care deeply about this stuff
http://www.ucolick.org/~sla/leapsecs/dutc.html

You're wasting your time Ben.

Hu-Flung-Dung was out to have an argument. 365 days was a good enuf
approximation of a year in the context it was originally used.

He's just another ignorant RBR'er