This is the perfect approach with budding technology (as well as other things).
For the record, for anyone jumping halfway into this thread, we’ve been talking about a literal 1 or 2 second variance out of an entire year. (that 0.01% estimate was not an exaggeration)
IE: We are nitpicking to the nth degree here, LOL
That being said, I am all about precision. I originally wanted the same as you, @fieldsjm. I wanted each cycle to start and end with exactly 0 & 100. I even went so far as to create my own personal API listing the next ten years for my location.
The irony is, it worked great, but the timeanddate station (where I originally grabbed the data) was a few miles away… so I had to shift to bring “T&D time” over to “TWC time”.
(since TWC is where we are getting the daily data from)
So the question I have for myself now is, should I take the next ten years of T&D data, and subtract ten seconds from each Summer Solstice?
(ugg, I don’t like a test that takes a year to get a single sample… and calibrating one location off of another is another can of worms)
Here is an interesting perspective on this you may enjoy.
I do not believe the two seconds variances I saw in my 15 year skim was due to any astronomical shift. (it bounced around inside the 2 sec window) Now honestly, I have not done the math, but my guess would be it may take a whole lifetime or longer for the Solstice dayLength to really shift a second.
No. What I think is happening is this:
- We are tracking sunrise in seconds (not ms)
- We are tracking sunset in seconds (not ms)
- Both of those numbers are being rounded to the nearest second
- Then we subtract sunrise from sunset
- Which means the final answer may be off as much as 998 milliseconds (499 ms X 2)
Now if we apply that over a ten year period, then the results will always be within the range of -0.998 thru 0.998. (approx two seconds)
Now that I think about it, if I were being really anal, I would do my math based on the invisible zero between the two extremes. (because that is where the sun truly is)
I don’t want to sound like an old fuddy-duddy, but something is always lost when going from analog to digital. (as demonstrated in the first post here)
I suspect that the
+/- 1 second possibility are only due to us not seeing sunrise & set in milliseconds.
I’d love to see this built in.
(as well as historical data, if we are making a list, LOL)