Hello all. I’ve always been a digital clock user, but I am trying to get myself used to reading an analog watch.

For the most part it’s fine, taking me several extra seconds over digital so far.

But one thing I am struggling with is discerning the exact minute. Because the minute hand slowly moves over time as opposed to ticking, I have trouble telling whether or not it’s say…9:22 or 9:23 for example.

Because when the time is say…9:22 and 5 seconds, the hand will clearly be on the 9:22 mark. But when it’s 9:22 and 45 seconds, it looks like it’s actually 9:23 when it isn’t yet.

Is this just always a limitation that I’m stuck with using analog? How precise are you all with analog clocks? Is there a way I can more quickly determine the exact minute?

Thanks!

  • Randelung@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    5 hours ago

    The concept of numbers doesn’t come up. The way the hands are conveys the fraction of the hour or half day that has passed. There’s never a need to know the exact number, time is continuous and not discrete. The minute hand will move fractional minutes, too.

  • lemmy_outta_here@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    6 hours ago

    GenX here. I wanted to reassure you that it didn’t come naturally to me and i grew up when this was still taught in school. The real answer is practice. Read a clock several times a day for a few weeks. Take a moment to think about the mintue hand. Is it about 2/5 of the way to the next digit? 3/5? After a while, you won’t have to think. You will just recognize.

  • Mediocre_Bard@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    6 hours ago

    I … look at them. There is no actual thinking that occurs. If it is 9:22 then it is 9:22. If it is 9:23 then it is 9:23. I understand your question, but if the trailing side of the minute hand is not yet even with or past the plane of the upcoming minute, then it remains the previous minute.

    • laranis@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 hours ago

      Maybe to help the OP I’ll add a bit to your answer. The entire face of an analog clock is divided into fractional sections. Sounds like you’re really good at parsing those fractions, likely due to lots of practice.

      So, big hand after the nine and before the ten? Between :45 and :50. First half of that? Between :46 and :47. More toward the beginning of the split? :46

      Maybe OP hasn’t had as much practice so has to think about what 9 is in minutes? Nothing but practice would help get over that, I guess.

  • Pacattack57@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    5 hours ago

    I guess I’m at that age where stuff like this means I’m old 😂

    I’ll answer your question though: just buy a watch that the minutes are clearly marked with ticks and the minute hand moves by the minute and isn’t in constant motion.

    Here’s some friendly advice though. Before digital, there really wasn’t a way to be so accurate down to the minute. Remember there wasn’t even really a way to get the right time. You just got it from somewhere else and hoped that time was accurate. Most people set their watches to the places that we’re important to them, ie work. So that they they were on time to whatever it was that they needed to get to.

    With that said, anyone that needed pinpoint accuracy had other means of getting the time or they used very expensive chronometers that kept time extremely well. In other words normal people just did stuff a couple minutes early in case their watches were slow.

    ALL OF THAT to say if you want accuracy down to the minute, just use digital.

  • ooo@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    5 hours ago

    My primary wall clock has a second hand and clearly defined minute tick marks, and syncs nightly to public timekeeping signals (the so-called “atomic” clock). This satisfies my precision needs.

    If your watch doesn’t have a second hand you may want one that does. If you see the minute hand at 9:23 but the second hand it at 45 seconds, then you know it is 9:22:45. It does take an extra glance, but only when you need that exact time.

    However, that also depends on being synced to “real” time for it to matter. Therefore most analog watches will always be a little off. Over time (no pun intended) you would learn what the “drift” of the watch is.

    To ensure you are on time and you only had an analog watch, you would just be early to ensure you are not late.

  • FreedomAdvocate
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 hours ago

    Well this is certainly a question I never thought I’d read on the internet.

    The school systems need an overhaul.

    • dingus@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      4 hours ago

      This isn’t a problem with “the school system”. I know how to read an analog clock. But it’s not something I have ever done daily and so I have never been in practice with it.

      Half of the comments here seem to be confused by my question, instead simply instructing me how to read an analog clock in general.

      That wasn’t the question or my issue.

      On a wristwatch, the space between the numbers of the minute hand is pretty small. I am not elderly, but it is difficult for me to see quickly precisely at what tick mark the minute hand is at… especially if it is getting to be toward the next minute and I don’t realize.

      One user suggested to briefly also glance at the second hand when I need more precision, which seems to help alleviate part of the problem that I describe.

  • DeathByBigSad@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    7 hours ago

    Its six – five = (approx) 06:25:00 (notice minute hand is pointing at 5)

    its seven – eight’n’half = (approx) 08:42:05 (minute hand pointing between 8 and 9)

    I just do quick maths, I have multiplication table memorized from all the way to 9, since first grade.

    They literally make a “poem” on multiplication table in mainland China where I was from (all the way to 9x9, but multiples of 10 is obvious so they ommitted it, afiak).

    So my thought process is:
    一五的五 (1, 5 = 5)
    二五一十 (2, 5, 10)
    三五十五 (3, 5, 15)
    四五二十 (4, 5, 20)
    五五二十五 (5, 5, 25)
    五六三十 (5, 6, 30)
    五七三十五 (5, 7, 35)
    五八四十 (5, 8, 40)
    五九四十五 (5, 9, 45)
    (this is the point where my thoughts switch away from mandarin and just thinking pure numbers)
    5 x 10 = 50
    5 x 11 = 55
    5 x 12 = wait… no need, its just 0 mins again

    So yea just remember how to recall the “poem” out of thin air and summon the numbers, takes about like 1-2 seconds, mandarin being 1 sylable per charater make it easier to remember (七七四十九 – 5 sylables vs “Seven times seven is fourty nine” – 9 sylables). Sorry I don’t know how everyone else do multiplication tables, my brain works differently, but funny thing is, 11x11 to 14x14 really messed with my brain since it only goes to 9x9

    (Yes I typed all that just to show off how they literally crammed a weird entire multiplication “poem” in my head that’s still stuck in my head to this day when I’m no longer in the country lolz. Sorry for the boring wall of text xD)

    Edit: typos

  • zxqwas@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    9 hours ago

    I usually round to 5 minutes. If I for whatever reason need the exact minute it will take a couple of second to see, depending on the design of the clock.

  • palordrolap@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    10 hours ago

    Eventually you learn to recognise the hand positions almost like they’re symbols in their own right. You can tell the difference between an apostrophe and a comma, right? And in certain typefaces they’re identical symbols other than their position.

    For the same reason, you can tell the difference between an hour hand just past the 12 and an hour hand just past the 6. Then you learn what the other positions look like.

    Then you can read the minute hand to whatever precision you need.

    After that it’s just practise, practise, practise. Your read times will tumble and before long you’ll be completely used to it and be just as fast as with digital.

  • StrawberryPigtails@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    11 hours ago

    I don’t generally read them to the minute very often. For the most part, 5 min increments are close enough for what I need, most of the time. If I do need a more precise time, I’m usually already closely watching the clock and it’s just addition (was 1341 when I started this, now it’s 1345.).

    If I need to get the precise time, cold, than it’s as simple as: closest 5 min tick, then add or subtract minute ticks till you get to the minute hand

    Eventually you get to the point where it’s not something you consciously think about. You just look at the clock and then pattern recognition takes over and you just know what time it is.

  • Deestan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    38
    ·
    edit-2
    17 hours ago

    I grew up with analog clocks and can read them at a glance.

    For the most part, I don’t really care precisely about minute. E.g. the analog clock in my kitchen is only used to tell me that it’s “roughly 2 minutes past 5 soon” and it’s enough for me to put the potatoes on.

    If I need to know precisely whether it’s 16:03 vs 16:04, I use a digital clock. Though mostly because my analog clocks are not precisely synced at all times.

    Back when analog was the norm, nobody cared about a minute here or there unless they had some specific profession. Like, the bus came “15:15 ish maybe 5 minutes early maybe 10 minutes late”. Everyone’s clock were off by at least 2 minutes anyway.

    Today in the digital age, the bus schedule says “15:17”

    • dingus@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      16 hours ago

      Today in the digital age, the bus schedule says “15:17”

      Yeah essentially lol. That’s one of the reasons I had never been super into analog clocks beforehand.

  • yesman@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    16 hours ago

    I think of analog time as kinda a pie chart telling me how much of the minute and hour that’s elapsed. So I don’t see 13:45, I see 75% past one o’clock.

    Does that make sense?

    • fitjazz@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      13 hours ago

      This is why I hate when people ask me what time it is. I can glance at my watch and know what time it is but not in a format that makes sense to other people. In order to tell someone what time it is I have convert to a “normal” format and that makes it look like I cannot quickly read my own watch.

      • ooo@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 hours ago

        That’s when you reply “TIME FOR A NEW WATCH” and give them a shit-eating grin until they leave.

  • CobblerScholar@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    13 hours ago

    Imo for most applications that I’d be using an analog clock for a time difference of even up to 5-10 minutes is irrelevant. If I really needed up to the minute accuracy I’m using a digital clock with the seconds counting down