|
%I #20 Aug 21 2012 14:47:33
%S 0,2,4,6,8,11,12,15,16,28,29,32,33,36,38,40,42,44,47,48,51,52,64,65,
%T 68,69,72,74,76,78,80,83,84,87,88,100,101,104,105,108,110,112,114,116,
%U 119,120,123,124,136,137,140,141,144,146,148,150,152,155,156,159,160
%N Different leap years in the Gregorian and the revised Julian calendars
%C Terms divided by 100, e.g., 28 indicates year 2800, which is a Gregorian leap year, but not a revised Julian leap year. Values below 28 are "proleptic" (only based on the formula).
%H M. Milankovitch, Das Ende des julianischen Kalenders und der neue Kalender der orientalischen Kirchen, Astronomische Nachrichten, <a href="http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/full/seri/AN.../0220/0000203.000.html">volume 220</a> (1924), pages 379-384.
%H Claus Tøndering, Frequently Asked Questions about Calendars, <a href="http://www.tondering.dk/claus/cal/node3.html#SECTION00323000000000000000">Don't the Greeks do it differently?</a>
%H Wikipedia, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revised_Julian_calendar">Revised Julian calendar</a>
%F ( N // 9 = 2 | N // 9 = 6 ) <> ( N // 4 = 0 )
%e 28 mod 9 is not 2 or 6, but 28 mod 4 is 0: 2800 is a Gregorian leap year.
%e 29 mod 9 is 2, but 29 mod 4 is not 0: 2900 is a revised Julian leap year.
%Y A008586 enumerates "Gregorian leap centuries" (N // 4 = 0).
%Y A193910 enumerates "revised Julian leap centuries".
%K nonn,easy
%O 1,2
%A _Frank Ellermann_, Aug 07 2011
|
