Why are there 12 months in a year instead of 365?

  • Thread starter Phy_enthusiast
  • Start date
In summary, the current calendar system of 12 months with varying lengths was originally established by the Romans due to their preference for this arrangement. While it may have been influenced by the lunar cycle, it was primarily based on the Roman's perception of lucky and unlucky numbers and their desire to fit the months into a year. Despite proposals for a more rational and decimal-based calendar system, such as the French Republican calendar and The World Calendar, the traditional Roman-based calendar remains in use due to inertia and tradition. Additionally, astronomers often use a Julian date system, counting days from January 1, 4713 BCE, which is based solely on days and does not follow the traditional calendar system.
  • #1
Phy_enthusiast
38
0
As Earth takes 365 days to revolve around sun then why are days grouped into 12 months and we don't have calendar that goes from1 to 365.
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
  • #2
We DO have a calendar that goes from 1 to 365. It is called the Julian calendar. You can use it if you like. Good luck with that.
 
  • #3
ok. than why are they grouped int0 12 months carrying 30 or 31 days?
 
  • #4
Days are grouped into 12 months because the Romans liked it that way. There is no other reason but historical circumstances.
It's the same kind of question as asking why is the day divided into 24 hours. There's simply no physical meaning behind it.

And just to clarify phinds' comment, it was a jab at your saying the year is 365 days long, which is how it was assumed to be before the Gregorian reform. The actual length of a year is not a well-rounded integer number of days, but is closer to 365.25. That's not the exact value either, but it is what the Gregorian calendar uses as the calculation basis, causing every fourth year to have 366 days, and producing less of an accumulating error.
 
  • #5
Bandersnatch said:
Days are grouped into 12 months because the Romans liked it that way. There is no other reason but historical circumstances.
Is it not partly related to trying also to have some reference to the lunar cycle?
 
  • #6
I think it is not partly but fully related to lunar cycle...
 
  • #7
Phy_enthusiast said:
I think it is not partly but fully related to lunar cycle...
Yes, you're right. It's true as far as the early roman calenar goes(the one with ten months in a year and a gap during winter).

However, from that base lunar calendar, a number of alterations were made that eventually ended up being the calendar that we know. These alterations, before the Julian reform, were based mostly on the Roman perception of lucky and unlucky numbers and altering the length of months to fit in a year.

If the months were fully informed by lunar phases, we'd have 12.3 months in a year, each with 29 or 30 days in it.
 
  • #8
At any rate the question is relevant: with our current much more precise knowledge of the solar system's dynamics, couldn't we conceive of a more rational timing & calendar system? one which is much more regular (and hopefully decimal-based), not having hours of 60 minutes, days of 24 hours, months of different lengths, leap-years and all that b*t?
Have any proposals been made for a more rational timekeeping method?
 
  • #9
Gerinski said:
At any rate the question is relevant: with our current much more precise knowledge of the solar system's dynamics, couldn't we conceive of a more rational timing & calendar system? one which is much more regular (and hopefully decimal-based), not having hours of 60 minutes, days of 24 hours, months of different lengths, leap-years and all that b*t?
Have any proposals been made for a more rational timekeeping method?

Why? What would be the point? You seem to be trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist. Really, don't you think there are more important things to worry about?
 
  • #11
In the US we cannot even convince people to use the metric system, you want to change the calendar! It can never happen. Just to much inertia and tradition and no real reason.
 
  • #12
Those ten day weeks are a killer. Today, the French can barely struggle thru four and a half days a week. And what's the deal with no weekend?

I wish they had bagged the metric system with the weird calendar, just so we wouldn't have to hear about how great it is all the time.
 
  • #13
A more rational revision of the current Roman based calendar has been proposed but it hasn't caught on either. It divides the year into four quarters of 91 days each with three months of 31,30 and 30 days (364.days). The remaining day is called World Day comes between a Saturday and Sunday. 364 is divisible by 7, so every date falls on the same day of the week every year. Leap years are handled the same way and the World Calender follows the Gregorian Reform for leap years. Every common year has the same calendar.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_World_Calendar
 
Last edited:
  • #14
phinds said:
We DO have a calendar that goes from 1 to 365. It is called the Julian calendar. You can use it if you like. Good luck with that.

Astronomers often use Julian dates which are based only on days. Today's Julian date is 2,456,489.5 (16 July, 2013). The days are counted from 1 January, 4713 BCE.

http://aa.usno.navy.mil/data/docs/JulianDate.php
 
Last edited:
  • #15
Integral said:
In the US we cannot even convince people to use the metric system, you want to change the calendar! It can never happen. Just to much inertia and tradition and no real reason.

Meters and kilograms are not just a craze
That the world is metric doesn’t seem to faze
The US and England who remain in a daze
Confined to their islands immersed in a haze
At two ostriches the world continues to gaze

Bobbywhy
 
  • #16
Gerinski said:
At any rate the question is relevant: with our current much more precise knowledge of the solar system's dynamics, couldn't we conceive of a more rational timing & calendar system? one which is much more regular (and hopefully decimal-based), not having hours of 60 minutes, days of 24 hours, months of different lengths, leap-years and all that b*t?
Have any proposals been made for a more rational timekeeping method?

The time keeping method by lunar cycle is the gift of ancient civilisation (mainly indians), modern civilisation should infact find out new method based on modern physics and astronomy.
 
  • #17
Phy_enthusiast said:
The time keeping method by lunar cycle is the gift of ancient civilisation (mainly indians), modern civilisation should infact find out new method based on modern physics and astronomy.
I guess we are forced to keep using the day-night cycle anyway, otherwise we would mess up with our circadian rhythm, and it is possible that the lunar cycle has biological implications too.
 
  • #18
Phy_enthusiast said:
The time keeping method by lunar cycle is the gift of ancient civilisation (mainly indians), modern civilisation should infact find out new method based on modern physics and astronomy.

Why? What would be the point? You seem to be trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist. Really, don't you think there are more important things to worry about?
 
  • #19
Bobbywhy said:
The US and England who remain in a daze
Confined to their islands immersed in a haze
At two ostriches the world continues to gaze

Not true so far as "England" is concerned (I assume you actually mean the UK).

Apart from a couple of things (pints of beer, and road distances and speed limits in miles) the UK has been using metric for decades.

But if course we still have to waste our time over engineering mixups with the US working in BTUs, kips, degrees F, etc, etc ...
 
  • #20
AlephZero said:
Not true so far as "England" is concerned (I assume you actually mean the UK).

Apart from a couple of things (pints of beer, and road distances and speed limits in miles) the UK has been using metric for decades.

But if course we still have to waste our time over engineering mixups with the US working in BTUs, kips, degrees F, etc, etc ...
I believe you're still measuring the surface of a building in square feet, fuel consumption in miles per imperial gallon, and yards are still pretty much in use.
 
  • #21
Gerinski said:
I believe you're still measuring the surface of a building in square feet, fuel consumption in miles per imperial gallon, and yards are still pretty much in use.

And they sell/buy/produce oil by the barrel like every other country - wait is that metric or imperial barrel of oil?
 
  • #22
1 barrel of oil = 42 U.S. gallons
 

1. Why are there 12 months in a year instead of 365?

The 12-month calendar is based on the lunar cycle, where each month corresponds to a full lunar cycle. It was first introduced by the ancient Egyptians and later adopted by the Romans.

2. How did the ancient Egyptians come up with the 12-month calendar?

The ancient Egyptians observed the cycles of the moon, which takes about 29.5 days to complete. They divided the year into 12 months to correspond with the 12 lunar cycles, with an additional 5 days for religious observances.

3. Why don't we have 13 months in a year?

Having 12 months in a year has been a longstanding tradition and has become deeply ingrained in many cultures. Adding a 13th month would require a major restructuring of the calendar system, which would be difficult to implement globally.

4. How does the 12-month calendar align with the Earth's orbit around the sun?

The 12-month calendar does not perfectly align with the Earth's orbit around the sun, which takes approximately 365.24 days. To adjust for this, we have leap years every 4 years to add an extra day in February.

5. Are there any other calendar systems with a different number of months?

Yes, there are several calendar systems that use a different number of months. For example, the Chinese calendar has 12 months, but occasionally adds a 13th month to keep the calendar aligned with the solar year. The Islamic calendar has 12 months, but they are based on the lunar cycle and therefore do not align with the solar year.

Similar threads

  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Science and Math Textbooks
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • Classical Physics
2
Replies
48
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • General Discussion
Replies
5
Views
741
Back
Top