| |
In lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto, David Koudys wrote:
>
> This coming on the same February with a leap day in it, and the first leap
> year in 8 years!!!!
You mean besides the one four years ago? Yes, indeed, 2000 was a leap year.
Everyone knows that a year that's divisible by 4 is a leap year (well, barring
really young kids and such). Lots of people also know that you end up with a
few extra days piling up if you stick to that plan for a long time (hence the
"recognized" birthdays of a few famous presidents), so every year that's
divisible by 100 is NOT a leap year. However, a handful of people also know
that if you stick to that plan for a long time, you end up losing days at a
slower rate than you were gaining them, so every year that's divisible by 400
(like 2000) is still a leap year. Even that is still imperfect, which is why
they'll sometimes have 1-3 seconds that fall between the two years and don't
belong to either.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Great News!!!!
|
| (...) AHh, but the issue was that, iirc, (and maybe I dont), 2000 *wasn't* a leap year--but I could be wrong on that Lemmee go check 2000 calendars... D'oh! My bad! I once again have a faulty recollection! Not unheard of. And I stand corrected. (...) (20 years ago, 2-Feb-04, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Great News!!!!
|
| Dinner this month (if there is one, I'll wait for official word from the leaders...) is... (wait for it...) Friday the 13th!!!!!! Woot! This coming on the same February with a leap day in it, and the first leap year in 8 years!!!! Ooooohhhh, the (...) (20 years ago, 2-Feb-04, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
4 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
