We need a new standard for measuring time. Our current system

>>8445330
Just because we have a leap year every 4 years, is that really a good enough reason to convert our entire system to something else?

>>8445343
Yes because it's based off of days and years since it was the only way people were able to measure time historically. But now we have science, and better methods can be developed for measuring time. For example, the amount of time it takes for light to travel across X amount of Hydrogen atoms.

>>8445330
>seconds/minutes/hours/days/weeks/years
>not using the metric system

el oh el te be eightch

>>8445348
>"The second is the duration of 9,192,631,770 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the caesium-133 atom."

How exactly will changing that to
>the amount of time it takes for light to travel across X amount of Hydrogen atoms
fix anything?

>>8445330
>Our current system of seconds/minutes/hours/days/weeks/years is fucking barbaric.
Quite the opposite.
60 is divisible by 2,3,4,5,6,10,12,15 and 30.
By contrast the metric system (SI) seems crude and primitive, ESPECIALLY since it was developed long before the "superior" base 10 system.

>>8445330
>We have to make up some stupid bullshit like leap years, and leap seconds, because the system is so shitty
NO, it's because we're trying to apply a standardized system to such erratic (yet relevant) things as the Earth's rotation and orbit.

>am I just retarded?
Maybe. Lets see: how would you "improve" the current system?
Aside from ISO 8601, I see little room for improvement.
Of course, we could adopt "megaseconds" and such for scientific reasons, ditto Julian dates, but these seem like band-aid style "solutions".
What would you propose?
In particular, what are you trying to fix?

>>8445356
>By contrast the metric system (SI) seems crude and primitive, ESPECIALLY since it was developed long before the "superior" base 10 system.
Oops! should be:
ESPECIALLY since it was developed long after the "inferior" base 60 system.

I don't like it either, what would be a more efficient system?

10 seconds = 1 minute
10 minutes = 1 hour
10 hour = 1 day (?)


Maybe we should just change our numeral system to base 12 or base 60.

>>8446019
No that would just be super confusing since we're changing the definitions of minutes, hours, and days

>>8445330
>not including decade

>redesigning the wheel

>>8446019
How about

>10 metric hours in a day
>100 metric minutes in a metric hour
>100 metric seconds in a metric hour
Under this scheme, a metric second would be about 0.864 of a contemporary second

>>8446329
I actually kinda like that.
it'll never happen though

>>8446329
>100 metric seconds in a metric hour
you mean 100 metric seconds in a metric minute?

>>8446339
Yeah. Minutes would be 44% longer, and hours would be 144% longer

>>8445330
Unix time is already a thing. It can be expressed in terms of hecto- and kiloseconds for practical timescales.

The main obstacle is that changing it would create so much inconvenient work. Every document with a date, digital or written, would require you to calculate the time in your units through some obtuse formula. Not only that, historical dates, opening times of stores, it all would have to be realigned. And for what? You replaced one arbitrary system with another, the impending loss of divisibility is actually an issue, and nature still has constants which do fuckall to align to your system. You gained no convenience.

I can rather see a switch from base 10 to base 12 or 16. In that case, a couple of generations would have to learn foreign base calulations or how it is called.

>>8445330
I understand that using those units for anything scientific is idiotic and the whole 60 s = 1 min thing can be confusing, but all in all that's not a problem with how we take time, but the context it is measured in, namely the earth's orbit around the sun and its rotation. We can't change those.

>>8445348
>amount of time it takes for light to travel across X amount of Hydrogen atoms.
Stop talking about shit you don't understand.

>>8446348
Yeah but a second is still pretty much arbitrary, and unix time still has the involvement of months and days because it's based on time since January 1 1970

What's more important is we need to redefine the second in terms of fundamental physical constants instead of the properties of a particular element, ideally such that it will be an exact multiple of the Planck time.

>>8446366
>a second is still pretty much arbitrary
all units of measurement are cmopletely arbitrary you colossal retard

>>8445330
>establish base 12 as the standard counting system
>24 hour days are now easily represented as two whole parts
>remove the concept of months entirely
>years are now measured in weeks
>weeks consist of 7 days to not trigger normies too much
>a year consists of 2 semesters of 12+1 weeks each
>the extra week is holiday
>