Happy palindrome day!

[Keith F. Lynch]

Today is (in American notation) 12/02/2021, a palindrome.

The last such day was about a decade ago, 11/02/2011.

When will the next such day be?
--
Keith F. Lynch - http://keithlynch.net/
Please see http://keithlynch.net/email.html before emailing me.

[Robert Woodward]

In article <soc4l0$b30$1...@reader1.panix.com>,

"Keith F. Lynch" <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:

> Today is (in American notation) 12/02/2021, a palindrome.
>
> The last such day was about a decade ago, 11/02/2011.
>
> When will the next such day be?

I offer March 2, 2030 (03/02/2030)

--
"We have advanced to new and surprising levels of bafflement."
Imperial Auditor Miles Vorkosigan describes progress in _Komarr_.
ã-----------------------------------------------------
Robert Woodward robe...@drizzle.com

[Charles Packer]

On Fri, 03 Dec 2021 03:58:24 +0000, Keith F. Lynch wrote:

> Today is (in American notation) 12/02/2021, a palindrome.
>
> The last such day was about a decade ago, 11/02/2011.
>
> When will the next such day be?

Up until the turn of this century, the year was universally
notated by two digits. To my knowledge, the calendar police
haven't succeeded in getting the world to go four. Where is
the pope when you really need one? So...2/2/22 still looms.

[Andy Leighton]

On Fri, 3 Dec 2021 03:58:24 -0000 (UTC),

Keith F. Lynch <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:

> Today is (in American notation) 12/02/2021, a palindrome.
>
> The last such day was about a decade ago, 11/02/2011.

Also for us ISO date users. 2021-02-12.

Also if you are still using 7 segment LCDs (are equivalent
typeface) it is an ambigram (it is the same date if read
upside-down).

Probably still not as cool as the 2nd Feb 2020 - which was
a palindrome in US, UK and ISO notations. The day of the
year was a palindrome and the number of days left in the year
was also a palindrome.

--
Andy Leighton => an...@azaal.plus.com
"We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty!"
- Douglas Adams

[Paul Dormer]

In article <iLkqJ.82154$aF1....@fx98.iad>, mai...@cpacker.org (Charles

Packer) wrote:

>
> Up until the turn of this century, the year was universally
> notated by two digits. To my knowledge, the calendar police
> haven't succeeded in getting the world to go four. Where is
> the pope when you really need one? So...2/2/22 still looms.

In the UK, cheque books are printed with the first two digits of the year
already there. OK, I think they stopped this for a while just before the
millennium but I certainly have cheques with 20 in the date field.

Of course, nobody uses cheques any more. :-)

[Gary R. Schmidt]

On 03/12/2021 19:41, Charles Packer wrote:
> On Fri, 03 Dec 2021 03:58:24 +0000, Keith F. Lynch wrote:
>
>> Today is (in American notation) 12/02/2021, a palindrome.
>>
>> The last such day was about a decade ago, 11/02/2011.
>>
>> When will the next such day be?
>
> Up until the turn of this century, the year was universally
> notated by two digits.

Not "universal". Perhaps true where you live, but most definitely not
universal.

I have family documents that are hand-dated 18xx, and some forms which
are printed with "18__", with the appropriate value filled-in over the "__".

Cheers,
Gary B-)

[Keith F. Lynch]

Gary R. Schmidt <grsc...@acm.org> wrote:

> Charles Packer wrote:
>> Up until the turn of this century, the year was universally notated
>> by two digits.

> Not "universal". Perhaps true where you live, but most definitely
> not universal.

> I have family documents that are hand-dated 18xx, and some forms
> which are printed with "18__", with the appropriate value filled-in
> over the "__".

I have a book in which a previous owner wrote the current date in
standard American form, with a two-digit year, 61. This is annoying,
as I don't know whether that means 1861 or 1961. The book is old
enough that it could be either. And the date is definitely not
written with a ball-point or felt-tip pen, which would of course
rule out the former.

Some future owner may wonder if it was 2061. Or 2161.

[Keith F. Lynch]

Andy Leighton <an...@azaal.plus.com> wrote:
> Also for us ISO date users. 2021-02-12.

Not a palindrome.

> Probably still not as cool as the 2nd Feb 2020 - which was a
> palindrome in US, UK and ISO notations. The day of the year was
> a palindrome and the number of days left in the year was also a
> palindrome.

I don't count leading zeros.

A few years ago, I searched for numbers that are palindromes in both
binary and ternary, using an algorithm I invented which has since been
used to find the majority of known dual palindromes. One I discovered
was 8022581057533823761829436662099. The smallest (already known) are
1 and 6643.

It would be a much larger list if leading zeroes were allowed. For
instance 6 is 0110 in binary and 020 in ternary.

[Keith F. Lynch]

Robert Woodward <robe...@drizzle.com> wrote:
> "Keith F. Lynch" <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>> Today is (in American notation) 12/02/2021, a palindrome.
>> The last such day was about a decade ago, 11/02/2011.
>> When will the next such day be?

> I offer March 2, 2030 (03/02/2030)

When will the next such day be if leading zeroes aren't allowed?

[Andy Leighton]

On Sat, 4 Dec 2021 21:46:11 -0000 (UTC),

Keith F. Lynch <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:

> Andy Leighton <an...@azaal.plus.com> wrote:
>> Also for us ISO date users. 2021-02-12.
>
> Not a palindrome.

Because I messed up typing the date 2021-12-02 is the ISO format.

[Rink]

Op 3-12-2021 om 4:58 schreef Keith F. Lynch:

> Today is (in American notation) 12/02/2021, a palindrome.
>
> The last such day was about a decade ago, 11/02/2011.
>
> When will the next such day be?
>

I think the last one was :

21/02/2012 ?

(in your american notation)

[Gary McGath]

American notation is MM/DD/YYYY. 21/02/2012 isn't a valid date in that
notation.

--
Gary McGath http://www.mcgath.com

[Tim Merrigan]

That would be European/British notation (21 February 2012).

The next will be 22-02-2022 or 2-20-2022, depending on your notation
style.
--

Qualified immuninity = virtual impunity.

Tim Merrigan

--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com

[Keith F. Lynch]

Gary McGath <ga...@REMOVEmcgathREMOVE.com> wrote:

> Rink wrote:
>> I think the last one was :

>> 21/02/2012 ?

>> (in your american notation)

> American notation is MM/DD/YYYY. 21/02/2012 isn't a valid date in
> that notation.

Right. There was a recent XKCD about it. https://xkcd.com/2562/

[Rink]

Op 8-1-2022 om 22:16 schreef Keith F. Lynch:

> Gary McGath <ga...@REMOVEmcgathREMOVE.com> wrote:
>> Rink wrote:
>>> I think the last one was :
>
>>> 21/02/2012 ?
>
>>> (in your american notation)
>
>> American notation is MM/DD/YYYY. 21/02/2012 isn't a valid date in
>> that notation.
>
> Right. There was a recent XKCD about it. https://xkcd.com/2562/
>

You're right.
I make that mistake all the time.

American notation is highly illogical.....

Why do you first call the month, then the day and then the year?

Are digital clocks by you the same?
first the minutes then the seconds and then the hours ?

Rink

[Tim Merrigan]

No, the logical notation is YYYY/MM/DD HH/MM/SS. And the next
palindrome is 2030/03/02.

[Tim Merrigan]

On Thu, 13 Jan 2022 14:06:30 -0800, Tim Merrigan <tp...@ca.rr.com>
wrote:

>On Thu, 13 Jan 2022 22:08:09 +0100, Rink
><rink.hof.ha...@planet.nl> wrote:
>
>>Op 8-1-2022 om 22:16 schreef Keith F. Lynch:
>>> Gary McGath <ga...@REMOVEmcgathREMOVE.com> wrote:
>>>> Rink wrote:
>>>>> I think the last one was :
>>>
>>>>> 21/02/2012 ?
>>>
>>>>> (in your american notation)
>>>
>>>> American notation is MM/DD/YYYY. 21/02/2012 isn't a valid date in
>>>> that notation.
>>>
>>> Right. There was a recent XKCD about it. https://xkcd.com/2562/
>>>
>>
>>
>>You're right.
>>I make that mistake all the time.
>>
>>American notation is highly illogical.....
>>
>>Why do you first call the month, then the day and then the year?
>>
>>Are digital clocks by you the same?
>>first the minutes then the seconds and then the hours ?
>>
>>Rink
>
>No, the logical notation is YYYY/MM/DD HH/MM/SS. And the next
>palindrome is 2030/03/02.
>--

Oops, that's YYYY/MM/DD HH:MM:SS.

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <srq4br$1l6$1...@dont-email.me>,

Nope; hours, minutes, then (optionally) seconds.


--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com
Www.kithrup.com/~djheydt/

[Gary McGath]

On 1/13/22 4:08 PM, Rink wrote:
>
> American notation is highly illogical.....
>
> Why do you first call the month, then the day and then the year?

I tried to figure out when the divergence started. The US Declaration of
Independence is headed with the date July 4, 1776, though we commonly
refer to the holiday European-style as the "Fourth of July."

In some divergences between US and British uses, it's the British one
which has changed since colonial days. I've been unable to find any good
information in this case.

In an unrelated bit of amusement, I saw a video today pointing out the
error of another video that claimed to show how big "England" is by
superimposing a map of the UK (including Scotland and Northern Ireland)
on a map of the US.

[Andy Leighton]

On Fri, 14 Jan 2022 07:55:27 -0500,
Gary McGath <ga...@REMOVEmcgathREMOVE.com> wrote:
> On 1/13/22 4:08 PM, Rink wrote:
>>
>> American notation is highly illogical.....
>>
>> Why do you first call the month, then the day and then the year?
>
> I tried to figure out when the divergence started. The US Declaration of
> Independence is headed with the date July 4, 1776, though we commonly
> refer to the holiday European-style as the "Fourth of July."
>
> In some divergences between US and British uses, it's the British one
> which has changed since colonial days. I've been unable to find any good
> information in this case.

With the month as an English word usage has moved more to "nth of
Month" rather than "Month nth". Although quite a lot of UK national
newspapers still use "Month nth" on their front page, and I wouldn't
be surprised to see it in more formal usage (eg. business letters,
contracts) either.

I am not aware that England has ever used mm/dd/yy where each component
is numeric.

[Kevrob]

Did Wales get forgotten, again?

--
Kevin R

[Paul Dormer]

In article <srrrs0$lfq$1...@dont-email.me>, ga...@REMOVEmcgathREMOVE.com

(Gary McGath) wrote:

>
> In some divergences between US and British uses, it's the British one
> which has changed since colonial days. I've been unable to find any
> good information in this case.

I am reminded of a dramatised documentary the BBC did a few years ago
about the execution on Charles I. In a dramatised scene you see the
clerk of the Commons starting a new year - 1st January 1649. But all the
actual documents they showed on screen had it as January 1648.

[Tim Merrigan]

On Fri, 14 Jan 2022 07:55:08 -0800 (PST), Kevrob <kev...@my-deja.com>
wrote:

Well, a map that includes England, Scotland, and -Ulster- (Northern)
Ireland would, perforce, include Wales, unless it was excised from the
map.

[Kevrob]

On Friday, January 14, 2022 at 4:27:34 PM UTC-5, merri...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Jan 2022 07:55:08 -0800 (PST), Kevrob <kev...@my-deja.com>
> wrote:

[snip]

> >Did Wales get forgotten, again?

> Well, a map that includes England, Scotland, and -Ulster- (Northern)
> Ireland would, perforce, include Wales, unless it was excised from the
> map.
> --

A map that included Ulster would also include the 3 counties of
that province that the British concede are in the Republic.

--
Kevin R

[Keith F. Lynch]

Gary McGath <ga...@REMOVEmcgathREMOVE.com> wrote:
> In some divergences between US and British uses, it's the British
> one which has changed since colonial days.

Especialy in pronunciation. "RP" came from one 18th century stage
actor with a speech defect.

> In an unrelated bit of amusement, I saw a video today pointing out the
> error of another video that claimed to show how big "England" is by
> superimposing a map of the UK (including Scotland and Northern Ireland)
> on a map of the US.

Mercator projection?

[Gary McGath]

On 1/15/22 12:26 PM, Keith F. Lynch wrote:

>> In an unrelated bit of amusement, I saw a video today pointing out the
>> error of another video that claimed to show how big "England" is by
>> superimposing a map of the UK (including Scotland and Northern Ireland)
>> on a map of the US.
>
> Mercator projection?

The video didn't say. If I've got it right, the distance from
southernmost England to northern Scotland is around 550 miles, which is
less than half the distance from Boston to Miami. My recollection is
that Great Britain looked proportionally bigger than that in the video,
so it may have been using an unadjusted Mercator projection.

[Andy Leighton]

On Sat, 15 Jan 2022 17:26:49 -0000 (UTC),

Keith F. Lynch <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:

> Gary McGath <ga...@REMOVEmcgathREMOVE.com> wrote:
>> In some divergences between US and British uses, it's the British
>> one which has changed since colonial days.
>
> Especialy in pronunciation. "RP" came from one 18th century stage
> actor with a speech defect.

Citation needed.

Every single source (and some of them are a lot more authoritative
than you) I have seen say the origins are murky but seem to come from
the public schools at the end of the 18th century.

Also as you may know RP is much different today than in the past, and
may have fractured into 3 subtypes. Also it is spoken by a minority.
We have plenty of regional accents which sound nothing like RP.

[Paul Dormer]

In article <slrnsu68g8....@azaal.plus.com>, an...@azaal.plus.com

(Andy Leighton) wrote:

> Also as you may know RP is much different today than in the past, and
> may have fractured into 3 subtypes.

There was a news item a few years ago about how even the Queen's accent
has changed over the years. I think she used to pronounce her daughter's
name as 'en'.

[Keith F. Lynch]

Rink <rink.hof.ha...@planet.nl> wrote:
> American notation is highly illogical.....
> Why do you first call the month, then the day and then the year?

I agree that it's illogical. But it's what we're used to.

Similarly with the "short scale," in which a billion means a thousand
million rather than a million million. The US has always used it.
Britain adopted it about half a century ago. Before that Britain used
the more logical long scale, which I see that your country still uses.

> Are digital clocks by you the same?
> first the minutes then the seconds and then the hours ?

No. It's hours, minutes, then seconds. But in the US it's mostly
12-hour time, not 24-hour time, though that may be changing. Some
say it's irrational to have 60-second minutes and 60-minute hours
but express those numbers in base 10. For a few years the French
used 100-second minutes, 100-minute hours, and 10-hour days.

It's interesting that time below seconds is decimal. Or rather base
1000. We use milliseconds, microseconds, nanoseconds, etc. (Nobody
uses kiloseconds, megaseconds, gigaseconds, etc.) (Well, *I* do, but
I'm weird.) But there's an older system, in which a 60th of a second
is called a third, a 60th of a third is a fourth, etc. If you've read
Copernicus, he even uses fifths, which is an impressively short time
interval for the 16th century, which was before even the invention of
the pendulum clock.

[Gary McGath]

On 1/16/22 2:30 PM, Keith F. Lynch wrote:
> No. It's hours, minutes, then seconds. But in the US it's mostly
> 12-hour time, not 24-hour time, though that may be changing.

ObSF: "It was a bright cold day in April, and the clocks were striking
thirteen." (First sentence of 1984)

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <ss225m$sk$1...@dont-email.me>,

Gary McGath <ga...@REMOVEmcgathREMOVE.com> wrote:
>On 1/16/22 2:30 PM, Keith F. Lynch wrote:
>> No. It's hours, minutes, then seconds. But in the US it's mostly
>> 12-hour time, not 24-hour time, though that may be changing.
>
>ObSF: "It was a bright cold day in April, and the clocks were striking
>thirteen." (First sentence of 1984)
>

ISTR that some of the early town clocks were 24-hour.

/google

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prague_astronomical_clock

Meg got to visit Prague a few years ago (nursemaiding one of her
lawyer boss's elderly clients. I'll ask her if she saw this,
when she gets home. Odds are, she did.

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <r5txF...@kithrup.com>,

Dorothy J Heydt <djh...@kithrup.com> wrote:
>In article <ss225m$sk$1...@dont-email.me>,
>Gary McGath <ga...@REMOVEmcgathREMOVE.com> wrote:
>>On 1/16/22 2:30 PM, Keith F. Lynch wrote:
>>> No. It's hours, minutes, then seconds. But in the US it's mostly
>>> 12-hour time, not 24-hour time, though that may be changing.
>>
>>ObSF: "It was a bright cold day in April, and the clocks were striking
>>thirteen." (First sentence of 1984)
>>
>ISTR that some of the early town clocks were 24-hour.
>
>/google
>
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prague_astronomical_clock
>
>Meg got to visit Prague a few years ago (nursemaiding one of her

>lawyer boss's elderly clients). I'll ask her if she saw this,

>when she gets home. Odds are, she did.
>

She did; but the clock was undergoing restoration at the time and
the dials were covered. But she did get to go up in the tower
and see all the machinery. And then she got to go through the
town hall and observe all the additions that had been made to it
over the centuries.

[Peter Trei]

I did not know that about Copernicus.

However, we use terms like ' a quarter of a second'. Just not very often.
Most uses of sub second periods are fairly recent, and mostly in technical
and scientific contexts, where the metric system dominates.

Pt

[Kerr-Mudd, John]

It's still a bit out of date; the Earth orbits the Sun, not the other way around!

--
Bah, and indeed Humbug.