0
$\begingroup$

There is a popular rule to determine which year is a leap year or not.

  1. The year is exactly divisible by four (with no reminder);

  2. If the year is divisible by $100$ (years ending in two zeros), it is not a leap, except if

  3. It is also divisible by $400$ (in this case it will be a leap year).

According to the rule above,the AD $4000$ will be a leap year because it is divisible by $400$. Maybe the truth is not so.

We calculate one year as $365$ days instead of $365.2422$ days,every four years to add one day for an adjustment,this action will add $44$ minutes, $56$ seconds every $4$ years.

$$4 * 0.2422 \text{ days} = 0.9688 \text{ days}$$ $$0.9688 * 24 \text{ hours} = 23.2512 \text{ hours}$$ $$0.2512 * 60 \text{ minutes} = 15.072 \text{ minutes}$$ $$0.072 * 60 \text{ seconds} = 4.32 \text{ seconds}$$ $$24\text{ hours } - 23 \text{ hours } 15 \text{ minutes } 4 \text{ seconds } = 44 \text{ minutes } 56 \text{ seconds.}$$

Every $100$ cycles which cycle contains $4$ years will result in $3.12$ more day.

$$\frac{(44*60+56)*100}{60*60*24} = 3.12 \text{ day}.$$

So we introduce the concept century leap year. A century leap year is a leap year in the Gregorian calendar that is evenly divisible by $400$. Like all leap years, it has an extra day in February for a total of $366$ days instead of $365$.

The first 100 year, not leap year, no 29 February,365 days.
The second 100 year, not leap year, no 29 February, 365 days.
The third 100 year, not leap year, no 29 February, 365 days.
The forth 100 year, leap year, 29 February, 366 days.

Every $400$ years we calculate more $3.12-3=0.12$ days!

Every $4000$ years with same rule,we calculate more

$$(3.12-3)*10 = 0.12*10 = 1.2 \text{ days!}$$

So I think that AD $4000$ is not a leap year, and we should minus one day to make the adjustment, no 29, February in AD $4000$.

Am I right?

$\endgroup$
4
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ What you're really hinting at is that the leap year scheme we have is simply an approximation and imperfect. Which really shouldn't be that shocking; it's human-made. You might find this YouTube video by Matt Parker an interesting watch. $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 2, 2022 at 5:17
  • $\begingroup$ From en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tropical_year#Calendar_year: If society in the future still attaches importance to the synchronization between the civil calendar and the seasons, another reform of the calendar will eventually be necessary. … This means there should be fewer and fewer leap days as time goes on. A possible reform would be to omit the leap day in 3200, keep 3600 and 4000 as leap years $\endgroup$
    – Martin R
    Commented Nov 2, 2022 at 5:35
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ 4000CE is supposed to be a leap year because we say so. Better approximations of the tropical year than Gregorian calendar have been considered from time to time (see for instance Milanković's revised Julian calendar en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revised_Julian_calendar ). As others have pointed out, a lot of factors that we do not control or can't foresee come into play in 2000 years, last but not least rotation and revolution periods changing. Nowadays we have the option of introducing leap seconds, which we've been doing since 1972 (and some say we should stop for practical reasons). $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 2, 2022 at 5:44
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ As others have hinted: the OP is not asking the question they think they're asking. Perhaps they're asking "what years should be leap years?". But the literal question "what years are leap years?" is hard-wired into the definition of the Gregorian calendar (more formally than a "popular rule"). $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 2, 2022 at 6:14

0

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .