Klarinet Archive - Posting 000098.txt from 2000/01

From: "Edwin V. Lacy" <el2@-----.edu>
Subj: RE: [kl] Re: [[kl] Re: Y2K]
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2000 17:19:21 -0500

On Tue, 4 Jan 2000, Benjamin Maas wrote:

> If this is true (and I have heard it before), why do all of my
> calendars have a Feb 29 on it?

A year which ends in two zeros, such as 1700, 1800, 1900, 2000, etc., is a
leap year only if it also is evenly divisible by 400. So, 1600 was a leap
year, 1700, 1800 and 1900 were not, 2000 is, etc. It's all part of the
effort to make the length of the calendar year as nearly as possible equal
to the length of the earth's rotation around the sun. Even our use of
leap years, non-leap years in certain centennial years, etc., doesn't
quite accomplish it. Occasionally, we have to have "leap seconds" in
order to bring things back into proper coordination. We had a leap second
a few years ago. I have to confess that I didn't notice it!

Ed Lacy
el2@-----.edu

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe from Klarinet, e-mail: klarinet-unsubscribe@-----.org
Subscribe to the Digest: klarinet-digest-subscribe@-----.org
Additional commands: klarinet-help@-----.org
Other problems: klarinet-owner@-----.org