Don't fix the problem just change the parameters
-
I feel like I'm going insane reading these comments about how difficult it is to read analog clocks, how it needs too much understanding of maths, how it takes too long,...
Can someone please confirm: you just look, for a fraction of a second, at the clock face and know the time, right?
Learning to read the clock was like... A couple of lessons and some homework in the 2nd grade, and everyone got it.
wrote last edited by [email protected]I feel like I'm going insane reading these comments about how difficult it is to read analog clocks,
Some of these comments are made by lazy idiots arguing that there is nothing wrong with being lazy idiot.
-
I feel like I'm going insane reading these comments about how difficult it is to read analog clocks, how it needs too much understanding of maths, how it takes too long,...
Can someone please confirm: you just look, for a fraction of a second, at the clock face and know the time, right?
Learning to read the clock was like... A couple of lessons and some homework in the 2nd grade, and everyone got it.
I can confirm. You are not insane.
-
No, I mean the progression towards the equinoxes - historically the equinoxes were a common way to demark calendar dates, and as a result they're a useful reference point. Not universal, of course, but still frequently used enough to be useful when discussing this topic.
I get you're arguing because, well, this is the internet and I contradicted you. That's how it works, our egos are too tied up in our comments alone and it's too easy to read any tone into a comment that we'd like. We get defensive, our wounded egos make things heated. So in that spirit, let me be explicit that I'm not trying to be rude to you when I say this: You're oversimplifying the metaphor to make your point.
For example: I've been sitting around for a full day, but the damn clock says only twelve minutes have gone by.
You adjust a sundial in the morning every day, and then can read it from there (assuming it hasn't been jostled) - but you still have to be aware of the rules and conventions of the system, and work within it's boundaries. If we arbitrarily dismiss critical parts of it's operation, there will be no meaning in anything we have to say. The territory of things like "clocks don't measure time, they measure circles and everything we derive from them is thence wild and baseless speculation"; literally true and I can defend that position until we both die of carefully-measured old age, but reduced to the point that it's completely meaningless.
Do you have a link or something that explains "progression towards the equinoxes". I never heard of that and can't find anything about it.
-
Do you know how to read a sundial?
wrote last edited by [email protected]Yes. The same as analogue clock, genius
-
Do you have a link or something that explains "progression towards the equinoxes". I never heard of that and can't find anything about it.
wrote last edited by [email protected]You understand that it's just a description, right? "The progression of time towards the equinoxes". It's not a formal term.
-
But why add unnecessary complexity?
Like analog clocks are fine, they show time progress in a way digital don't.But why read it in that more convoluted way? Like, I can tell you that you have 10100~bin~ seconds to answer some question, and you can tell that's 20 seconds, but why the fuck do it that way. The only time it's "five minutes till quarter to four in the afternoon" rather than 15:40 is when writing an assay, perhaps.
But why read it in that more convoluted way?
Perhaps just the thing where you are from? I never heard anyone referring to "five minutes before quarter to", it is idiotic. You would say "twenty to four".
-
You understand that it's just a description, right? "The progression of time towards the equinoxes". It's not a formal term.
wrote last edited by [email protected]You can't just make stuff up and then say "it's just a description". It looks like you just remembered precession of the equinoxes wrong and doubled down once somebody called you out on it?
If it's a description of something, what does "progression of the equinoxes" describe? Astronomically it's complete gibberish, so I'm not sure what it's describing.
Update: regarding your edit
"The progression of time towards the equinoxes"
This sentence makes no sense. How can time itself progress towards equinoxes, which are points in time?
-
Why would a tower be digital?
I was being sarcastic
-
I feel like I'm going insane reading these comments about how difficult it is to read analog clocks, how it needs too much understanding of maths, how it takes too long,...
Can someone please confirm: you just look, for a fraction of a second, at the clock face and know the time, right?
Learning to read the clock was like... A couple of lessons and some homework in the 2nd grade, and everyone got it.
To be fair if you are never exposed to it (and judging by the comments that seems to have happened in the US) you can't tell the time by "just looking at it". But analog clocks are objectively simpler to teach to children (let's say three to eight years old).
-
To the title, that's always been the case.
"no child left behind" turned into "make it easier until everyone passes"
Shit isn't new. it's been going on for a long, long ass time.The less educated a populous is, the less likely they are to think critically, think for themselves, and ultimately the easier they are to control.
-
Eh, we don't teach them how to read a sundial or make a fire anymore either. I don't see a problem with removing old technology from school instruction.
wrote last edited by [email protected]"Old technology" like, hammers, spoons and books
Let's get rid of the wheel. That crap was invented ages ago.Update: and if you can't read a sun dial - which by the way is just reading the number the freaking shadow points at - the US should seriously consider teaching stuff like that again.
-
You can't just make stuff up and then say "it's just a description". It looks like you just remembered precession of the equinoxes wrong and doubled down once somebody called you out on it?
If it's a description of something, what does "progression of the equinoxes" describe? Astronomically it's complete gibberish, so I'm not sure what it's describing.
Update: regarding your edit
"The progression of time towards the equinoxes"
This sentence makes no sense. How can time itself progress towards equinoxes, which are points in time?
wrote last edited by [email protected]The significance of the equinox in premodern calendar systems is pretty well established - stonehenge is an easy example of how it was taken into consideration, and was used to mark out significant dates.
How can time itself progress towards equinoxes, which are points in time?
I think you might be overthinking what I said. To answer your question: One day comes after another day. Eventually, on one of those days the arrangement of celestial bodies we call the equinox will happen. From wikipedia:
An equinox is equivalently defined as the time when the plane of Earth's equator passes through the geometric center of the Sun's disk.
We'll reach that arrangement again as time progresses. The progression of time, will bring us towards the point in which that arrangement occurs. If you would prefer, "progression towards the equinoxes" is a slightly less florid way of expressing the same concept.
(edit: posted prematurely, thanks cat. Finished my sentence, reworded something to sound less confrontational as that was not my intention)
-
wait analog is outdated?? what do you mean?? What else do people wear on their wrist?? some dystopian world your living in
Dated, not outdated. Or do I totally have the meaning of the word wrong?
-
I also wonder: what’s the goal of teaching this? Sure, a cursory lesson is a good idea, but making it a fundamental step seems nonsensical in a world that doesn’t require it at all. It’s like teaching how to sharpen a quill, it’s not needed anymore
Of course it's still needed. There still exist analog clocks almost everywhere. (At least in my country)
-
The significance of the equinox in premodern calendar systems is pretty well established - stonehenge is an easy example of how it was taken into consideration, and was used to mark out significant dates.
How can time itself progress towards equinoxes, which are points in time?
I think you might be overthinking what I said. To answer your question: One day comes after another day. Eventually, on one of those days the arrangement of celestial bodies we call the equinox will happen. From wikipedia:
An equinox is equivalently defined as the time when the plane of Earth's equator passes through the geometric center of the Sun's disk.
We'll reach that arrangement again as time progresses. The progression of time, will bring us towards the point in which that arrangement occurs. If you would prefer, "progression towards the equinoxes" is a slightly less florid way of expressing the same concept.
(edit: posted prematurely, thanks cat. Finished my sentence, reworded something to sound less confrontational as that was not my intention)
wrote last edited by [email protected]But calling the fact that time passed and we will reach another equinox at some point is like saying that "progression of time towards 5:43 pm" is a thing just because time always tends towards 5:43 and once we pass it, we use the next 5:43 as a target.
I develop calendar systems in my spare time and you should take a look at the leap year rule of SAC13, it takes the precession of the equinoxes into account.
The things you just said are just words thrown together - and again - just because you can't admit that you heard precession of the equinoxes in the past and misremembered it.
-
I feel like I'm going insane reading these comments about how difficult it is to read analog clocks,
Some of these comments are made by lazy idiots arguing that there is nothing wrong with being lazy idiot.
I don’t understand how you could possibly classify looking at a clock as lazy.
-
I feel like I'm going insane reading these comments about how difficult it is to read analog clocks, how it needs too much understanding of maths, how it takes too long,...
Can someone please confirm: you just look, for a fraction of a second, at the clock face and know the time, right?
Learning to read the clock was like... A couple of lessons and some homework in the 2nd grade, and everyone got it.
I don’t know, I’ve never particularly liked analogue clocks. I don’t think I ever thought of them as difficult to read, but it’s far superior to look at an exact number like digital usually features.
-
I don’t know, I’ve never particularly liked analogue clocks. I don’t think I ever thought of them as difficult to read, but it’s far superior to look at an exact number like digital usually features.
wrote last edited by [email protected]Disagree - it rarely matters to me if it's 13:24:56 or 13:25:05, but I do find the instant and intuitive gauging of time deltas super useful (as in, how long it's going to be to the full hour / to quarter past / ... ). Not saying you can't get that info from a digital clock as well, of course you can; but the physicality of analog clocks lends a good bit of intuition to this, I feel.
-
But calling the fact that time passed and we will reach another equinox at some point is like saying that "progression of time towards 5:43 pm" is a thing just because time always tends towards 5:43 and once we pass it, we use the next 5:43 as a target.
I develop calendar systems in my spare time and you should take a look at the leap year rule of SAC13, it takes the precession of the equinoxes into account.
The things you just said are just words thrown together - and again - just because you can't admit that you heard precession of the equinoxes in the past and misremembered it.
wrote last edited by [email protected]is a thing just because time always tends towards 5:43 and one we pass it, we use the next 5:43 as a target.
Yes exactly, which is why I said you may be overthinking it when you were trying to interpret it as anything more than this. The Equinox were a critical time for the calibration of sundials, hence why I chose them.
just because you can’t admit that you heard precession of the equinoxes in the past and misremembered it.
But, why? It would have been perfectly valid to bring up in the original context - you yourself brought up the complicating factor of minor celestial events in it's applicability to the subject - and "progression towards the equinox" is a fine-if-slightly-florid way to describe the passage of time towards a significant event. There's no reason for me to have done this.
(edit: this time I just forgot to finish my sentence. No cat involved)
-
Disagree - it rarely matters to me if it's 13:24:56 or 13:25:05, but I do find the instant and intuitive gauging of time deltas super useful (as in, how long it's going to be to the full hour / to quarter past / ... ). Not saying you can't get that info from a digital clock as well, of course you can; but the physicality of analog clocks lends a good bit of intuition to this, I feel.
That does make sense.
