> adrian.kla...@aklaver.com wrote:
> 
> The point is horology is cultural, see non-Western calendars and alternate 
> time keeping methods. Trying to maintain a distinction between the two 
> concepts only furthers the confusion. The inconsistencies you see are the 
> result of one(culture) intervening in the other(horology).

I intend the word “horology” to be taken in this sense:

« The word "horology" means "the art of making clocks and watches". So the 
intended meaning of the phrase "horological interval" is "what you'd measure 
with a clock". The implication is "what you'd measure with the best clock that 
there is (in other words, a caesium clock) but expressed in seconds and 
multiples thereof (hours, and minutes, but not days).” »

There’s nothing cultural about the size of the caesium unit. It simply emerges 
from the laws of physics. Maybe you don’t like the word “horology”. I’m open to 
suggestions for a better term of art.

But I hold fast to the idea that an atomic clock measures time and durations in 
one way and a calendar measures these in a different way. Seems to me that the 
whole business of calendars is nicely captured by the term “cultural”.

Maybe I could use the terms “atomic clock time” and “calendar time”. 

The “to_timestamp()” built-in function maps from “atomic clock time” to 
“calendar time”. And the “extract… epoch…” construct maps from “calendar time” 
to “atomic clock time”.

Think of it like this: if you add the interval “24 hours” to a moment just 
before the US “spring forward” moment (using timestamptz and, say “US/Pacific" 
time zone), then you get one answer, But if you do the same exercise using the 
interval “1 day”, then you get a different answer. Tom Lane has said that this 
is intended. You need a vocabulary that your inner voice can use when you 
decide, in the present application context, which of these is required. You 
can’t possibly rehearse the whole discussion about atomic clocks and calendars 
every time this question comes up. Rather, you need terms of art to support 
your thinking. For example:

«
In the following, “interval arithmetic” denotes “t2 := t1 + i” (addition) and 
“i := t2 - t1” (subtraction).

Interval arithmetic always uses cultural semantics for years and months. And it 
always uses horological semantics for hours, minutes and seconds*. Interval 
addition for days uses cultural semantics. But interval subtraction for days 
uses horological semantics.

* This is in the calendar regime where leap seconds are not accounted for.
»

You can’t write something like this without terms of art to support you.

Thanks again for your helpful insights. I’ll stop now.

Reply via email to