3 ms·
I can understand that it's numerically simpler to start at 0h00 but... don't we miss something related to the sun ???? It seem to me that the "best" reference
by olivierduval 4y ago
I can understand that it's numerically simpler to start at 0h00 but... don't we miss something related to the sun ????
It seem to me that the "best" reference point would be "mid-day" (at 12:00), when the sun is perpendicular to the planet. It can be easily "guessed" and synced I think... like it has been for millenaries before the clocks
So I guess that instead of 0h00:00-24h39:35 I would prefer -Oh:20:17 to 24:19:18 (centered on 12:00). Or we can just decorrelate "absolute time" (in h/m/s) and "time of day" (in %) where mi-day is 50% (actual duration in H/M/S to be depending on the planet) and mid-year is 50% of the actual rotation around the sun...