Featured Post from Villanova University

Leap Years and the Connection Between Astronomy and Our Lives

Feb 23, 2024

5 min

Most of us know February 29 as a whimsical anomaly—nothing more than a chance to tease our friends or colleagues born on this day as technically being a quarter of their purported age.


But how often do we think about the origins of the day as we now know it? Or about the near-universal implementation of this specific way to keep track of time? Do we ever consider the impact a leap year could have on everyday life?


Frank Maloney, PhD, an associate professor of astronomy and astrophysics at Villanova University, has been teaching for nearly 12 leap years (47 years). He is an expert in timekeeping and calendaring, calling them a “fundamental connection to our lives, ruled by the motion of objects in the sky,” because “everyone has to agree what day and time it is.”


Dr. Maloney currently teaches a course called “Earth: Our Habitable World,” where he discusses this and other connections between astronomy and people’s lives.


In the case of leap years, the astronomical phenomenon from which they originate—the Earth’s time to orbit the sun—is a very important one to accurately track.


“You want your calendar to keep pace with the seasons,” Dr. Maloney explained. “There are all sorts of ways of measuring the pace of the Earth around the sun, but the way that [also] keeps pace with seasons is called the tropical year, and unfortunately, there’s not an integer number of days in that year. We can’t ignore it, because after the first year you’re off by a quarter of a day and after four years off by a full day, and so on.”


Ancient civilizations were aware there were slightly more than 365 days in a solar year but didn’t know exactly how much more. Gradually, the seasons would become unsynchronized with the calendar, and those various civilizations added days back in at random times to realign.


“In those days, it might be possible to leave one area in April, and arrive [somewhere else] the previous December,” Dr. Maloney joked.


The concept of a leap year began with the Roman Empire’s implementation of Julius Caesar’s namesake calendar on January 1, 45 B.C.E., at his behest. The Julian calendar was a solar calendar, which consisted of a 365-day year, and a 366-day leap year every four years, without exception. It was often added as a duplicate day in the middle of February.


“But a year is not exactly 365 and a quarter days. It’s a little bit less,” Dr. Maloney explained. “By the Middle Ages, it was 10 or so days out of whack with the tropical year. Astronomers would have seen that very easily... but the reason to change it was not there.”


Not until the late 16th century, that is. And the reason it did change was because Easter had moved out of line with the vernal equinox.


“Nearly all calendars have a mystical, religious or theological component,” Dr. Maloney said. “In the Roman Church, Easter is reckoned as the first Sunday after the first full moon on or after the vernal equinox, or first day of spring.”


In order to have Easter fall back in line with the equinox, Pope Gregory XIII issued a papal bull in 1582, which declared a year to be a more accurate 365 days, 5 hours and 49 minutes in length (roughly).


What that meant for leap years was that, instead of every four years without exception, they would now occur every four years except on century marks, unless that century mark was divisible by 400. For example, 1900 was not a leap year, but 2000 was. The years 2100, 2200 and 2300 will not be leap years.


The global switch to a new calendar was not easy or done in haste. To enact the initial calendar change, 1582 went from October 4 to October 15 to eliminate extra accumulated days. Catholic countries mostly followed suit soon after, but many others resisted, as citizens feared it was a political trick. It took centuries to get to the near-universal use of the Gregorian calendar we have today.


Great Britain and other Commonwealth nations did not adopt the Gregorian calendar until 1752. An individual such as George Washington could have been considered to be born on one day in the Julian calendar and have a different birthday in the Gregorian calendar. In the American colonies, September 1752 skipped to the 14th day of the month from the second.


The most recent country to switch from the Julian to Gregorian calendar was Greece in 1923. By then, the calendar was roughly two weeks off from the tropical year. In the early 1900s, when globalization was commencing, this was a big deal.


“You could get in an airplane and fly someplace, and not even know what day you’d be landing. According to the calendar, it’d be time travel,” Dr. Maloney said.


Saudi Arabia still used a few elements of the Islamic calendar for fiscal purposes until 2016, and Afghanistan, Iran, Nepal and Ethiopia are the only countries in the world that do not officially use the Gregorian calendar currently.


So, what does all this mean for people today? For starters, historians and genealogists must be careful when studying historical dates and events. For example, a country may have still been using the Julian calendar during a particular time period, or perhaps an event might have occurred during the time days were skipped to make the switch from the Julian to the Gregorian calendars.


“If an infant were born [in the American colonies] on the second of September 1752, for example, and died on the 14th, they were not really 12 days old,” Dr. Maloney said. “Or if a war began in a country one day but started on a different day in a different country, it causes confusion.”


Leap years and other adjustments to timekeeping can also cause a plethora of computing and software issues, impacting multiple industries. This is especially true in the digital age where time-stamping is so ubiquitous. Case in point, on occasion, we actually have to add a leap second to time to account for the slowing of Earth’s rotation. These leap seconds are added after 11:59:59 on either December 31 or June 30, when needed.


“There’s a great deal of controversy about this particular practice,” Dr. Maloney said. “It really confounds software. A jet airplane, for example, can travel a fairly long distance in one second. Time has to be kept now to fractions of seconds, [even for things like] lawsuits and insurance policies. Timekeeping is a very important task for astronomers.”


It seems those astronomers have it figured out... for now. Even the Gregorian calendar will eventually need an adjustment, as its margin of error is about 27 seconds per year. That means every 3,236 years—so sometime in the early 4800s—an additional extra day will need to be added somewhere to correct it.


Luckily, we have some time to plan ahead.


You might also like...

Check out some other posts from Villanova University

5 min

Taming “The Bear”: Villanova Professor Examines Workplace Toxicity in FX’s Acclaimed Series

In the latest season of FX’s award-winning series “The Bear,” lead character and chef Carmen “Carmy” Berzatto finds himself at a crossroads. A culinary genius, Carmy has successfully overseen the reinvention of his family’s Italian beef shop as a high-end restaurant—shepherding a dedicated, if unpolished, crew of sandwich makers into a world of haute cuisine, fine wine and elevated service. However, over the course of this transition, his exacting standards have contributed to a culture of anxiety, dysfunction and resentment in the workplace. Despite staff members’ professional and personal growth, tempers still flare like burners on a range, with Carmy’s obsessive attention to detail and single-minded pursuit of perfection spurring conflict. By season’s end, grappling with the fallout from a mixed review seemingly influenced by the back-of-house “chaos,” the chef is forced to confront a complicated and thorny question: Am I getting in the way of my own restaurant’s success? Carmy’s dilemma, while fictional, reflects the very real challenges many modern businesses face when excellence is prioritized at the expense of psychological safety and workplace harmony. Per Manuela Priesemuth, PhD, who researches toxic work climates, aggression on the job and organizational fairness, the warning signs are all too frequently overlooked in high-pressure environments like restaurants. “Some high-stakes industries have a characteristic of having toxic behavior more accepted,” says Dr. Priesemuth. “When it’s more accepted or normed, it’s a real problem.” As she explains, workers in the food service industry, much like medical professionals in an operating room or military personnel in a combat zone, have a tendency to view measured communication and thoughtful interaction as a luxury or even, in some cases, a hindrance. Essentially, there’s a common misconception that working with an edge—yelling orders, avoiding dialogue and berating “underperformers”—gets the job done. “In all of these high-stakes environments where it’s thought there’s leeway to talk negatively or disparagingly, people are mistaken in the productivity result,” Dr. Priesemuth says. “It actually changes for the better in positive climates, because people who are treated with dignity and respect are better performers than those who are mistreated.” To Dr. Priesemuth’s point, research increasingly shows that workplace culture, not just talent or technical ability, is an essential driver of organizational success. In an environment like Carmy’s kitchen, where pride and passion often give way to personal attacks and shouting matches, the on-the-job dynamic can effectively undermine productivity. What may begin as an intended push for excellence can instead result in burnout, high turnover and weakened trust—outcomes that are especially problematic in collaborative, fast-paced industries like hospitality. “There’s even evidence that abusive behavior in restaurant settings can lead to food loss,” shares Dr. Priesemuth. “So, there is a sort of retaliation from the employees who are going through this experience, whether it’s measured [in profit margins] or impact on the customer.” In order to prevent these less-than-ideal outcomes, businesses should take steps proactively, says Dr. Priesemuth. More specifically, they should clearly articulate their values and expectations, considerately engage with their staff’s opinions and concerns and consistently invest in their employees’ growth and development. In the world of “The Bear,” a few of Carmy’s managerial decisions in the second season could be seen as moves in the right direction. At that juncture, he was leveraging his industry connections to provide his restaurant’s staff with the tools and training necessary to thrive in Chicago’s fine dining scene, building skills, confidence and goodwill. “If you give people voice—such as input on the menu, for example, or more autonomy in completing a certain task—it boosts morale,” says Dr. Priesemuth. “It helps people feel that they have input and that they are valued members of the team; it’s this sort of collaborative, positive relationship that increases commitment and performance.” Establishing this type of work culture, grounded in open communication, mutual respect and a shared sense of mission, takes concerted effort and constant maintenance. In situations in which toxicity has already become an issue, as it has in Carmy’s kitchen, the task becomes decidedly more difficult. Typically, it demands a long-term commitment to organizational change at the business’ highest levels. “Adjusting the tone at the top really matters,” says Dr. Priesemuth. “So, if the owner were to treat their chefs and waiters with the dignity and respect that they deserve as workers, that also trickles down to, for example, the customer.” A leader’s influence on workplace morale, she contends, is nuanced and far-reaching. When those in charge model a lack of empathy or emotional distance, for instance, a sort of toxicity can take root. Likewise, when they repeatedly show anger, animosity or frustration, those same feelings and attitudes can have an ingrained effect—regardless of a staff’s talent or ability. Given the outsized role owners, supervisors and managers play in shaping organizational culture, Dr. Priesemuth further notes, “Leaders must also feel that they’re being supported. You can’t have someone who’s exhausted, works 80 hours a week and has relationship and money issues and expect them to say, ‘What are your problems? What do you need?’” In many ways, her insights speak directly to the struggles Carmy faces and prompts throughout “The Bear’s” run. At every turn, he’s dogged by family and relationship troubles, mounting financial pressures and unresolved trauma from a past role. Ultimately, as would happen in real life, his difficulty in healthily processing and addressing these issues doesn’t just harm him; it affects his staff, manifesting itself as a need for control and a crusade for perfection. “There are spillover effects from your own personal life into your job role. In the management field, that has become increasingly clear,” says Dr. Priesemuth. “Whatever you’re going through, whether it’s from an old job or something personal, it will automatically spill over into your current work life and your interactions. And, vice versa, what’s happening to you at work will [impact you off the clock].” In dramatic fashion, the fourth season of “The Bear” concludes with Carmy acknowledging as much. Determining that there are other aspects of his life desperately in need of attention, he surrenders the reins of his business to chef de cuisine Sydney “Syd” Adamu and maître d’hôtel Richard “Richie” Jerimovich, appointing them part-owners. While the soundness of this decision remains a subject for the show’s next season, Carmy justifies the move with a blunt admission: “It’s the best thing for the restaurant. We have to put the restaurant first… I don’t have anything to pull from.” In the end, in both “The Bear” and management studies, there’s an understanding that building healthy and productive work environments requires active engagement and positive reinforcement on the part of leadership. In a sense, creating a strong work culture is shown to be a lot like preparing a phenomenal meal; it’s a matter of attentiveness, patience and care. Without those ingredients, the result could very well be a recipe for disaster.

4 min

An Expert Guide to the Papacy and Pope Francis

The death of Pope Francis marks a pivotal moment for the Catholic Church, ending a papacy that redefined the Church's relationship with the modern world. As the College of Cardinals prepares to gather in conclave, Catholics across the globe are closely watching to see whether the next pontiff will build upon Francis' legacy or chart a new course. The following experts are available to provide insight into a range of related topics, including Pope Francis' enduring impact and what lies ahead for the world's 1.4 billion Catholics: Massimo Faggioli, PhD Professor, Theology and Religious Studies Dr. Massimo Faggioli is a world-renowned expert on the history and administrative inner workings of the Catholic Church, with specific expertise in the papacy, Vatican II, the Roman Curia, liturgical reform, new Catholic movements and Catholicism and global politics. As quoted on NPR: "Historically, we see in different conclaves a certain swinging of the pendulum. What the conclave and the next pope cannot do is to ignore and deny the changing features of global Catholicism, which is much less European, much less white, less North American and more Global South..." Kevin Hughes, PhD Chair, Theology and Religious Studies Dr. Kevin Hughes is a leading historical theologian, offering insights into the life, legacy and impact of Pope Francis. He can also speak to the significance of the pope in Catholicism and the influence of his teachings on the global Catholic Church. As quoted on Scripps News: "[Pope Francis' selection] was really the Church extending beyond the limits of its European imagination. His Latin American identity was really crucial to embracing a new moment within the Church and opening the door in so many ways, and I think he bore witness to that throughout his papacy." Jaisy Joseph, PhD Assistant Professor, Systematic and Constructive Theology Dr. Jaisy Joseph is a trained ecclesiologist, able to address a wide range of topics relating to the papacy, conclave process and Catholic Church. Previously, she has commented on the Church's presence in Asia and the Global South, offering expert commentary on its growth, challenges and shifting influence. As quoted by ABC News Digital: "[The election of someone from the Global South would be] a move in that direction of how to be a global church. That move from a Eurocentric church to a truly global church—I think that's what Francis really inaugurated." Patrick Brennan, JD Professor of Law; John F. Scarpa Chair in Catholic Legal Studies Professor Brennan is an expert on the conclave process and the main rules that govern it. He can also speak to topics such as the contemporary and historical importance of secrecy in the conclave, what the cardinals may be looking for in the next pope and the factors that cause similarities and differences from one conclave to the next.  As quoted on Fox 29's Good Day Philadelphia: "The purpose of the general congregation is for the cardinals, who don't know each other in some cases, to get to know each other better as they learn about the current state of the Church and together decide on the needs of the Church and priorities for the new pontificate." Brett Grainger, ThD Associate Professor, Study of Spirituality and American Religious History Dr. Brett Grainger is a go-to source for discussions of the changing face and role of modern spirituality in America. He serves as an expert on contemporary religious trends and can also speak to the broader public reaction to Pope Francis' passing, especially outside of the Catholic faith. As quoted by Courthouse News Service: "People are disaffiliating from a tradition—that doesn't necessarily mean in fact that they don't believe in God anymore...What's more important is 'Is this giving me life? Is this making my life more meaningful? Is this giving me the kind of energy and purpose that I'm looking for?' That's where religion is going." Michael Moreland, JD, PhD Professor of Law and Religion; Director, Eleanor H. McCullen Center for Law, Religion and Public Policy Dr. Michael Moreland is a renowned scholar of constitutional law, religious freedom, public policy and ethics. He can provide expert commentary on items related to the Catholic right and the state of religious politics in the United States. As featured on NBC News Digital: Michael Moreland said the mass appeal of "Conclave" captured how, even in a secular modern age, there is still pervasive intrigue around "the ancient rituals of the Catholic Church." "The significance of the theological and spiritual aspects of Catholicism and this process of electing a pope was kind of reduced into partisan politics," he said. Ilia Delio, OSF, PhD Josephine C. Connelly Endowed Chair in Christian Theology Sr. Ilia Delio addresses topics in her work such as theology and evolution, technology and human becoming and understandings of Catholicity in a world of complexity. She can provide expert insight into Laudato Si', Pope Francis' position on the environment, the relationship between science and religion and integral ecology. As featured in the National Catholic Reporter: "We are clearly an Earth in crisis," with a reversal necessary to secure a sustainable future, said Ilia Delio... Delio posed a series of questions: about the relationship between religion and science; what Laudato Si', and Christianity more broadly, can offer ecological movements; and whether the concept of kinship or creation as family might better reflect humanity's place within nature than "care for creation." To speak with any of these media experts, please contact mediaexperts@villanova.edu.

3 min

Villanova Professor Sees Costs and Benefits in Corporate and Federal Return-to-Office Mandates

In early February, federal agencies submitted plans in accordance with an executive order to initiate an estimated 1 million government employees’ full-time return to their duty stations. The departments’ actions are among the latest in a series of RTO moves enacted since the start of 2025. Notably, they follow policy changes by corporate giants Amazon, AT&T and JPMorgan, who in January began requiring five days of in-person work for select staffers, with justifications ranging from strengthening culture to improving performance. With more employers expected to require in-office work in the coming months, some predict that 2025 could be the “year of the RTO mandate.” But, given the arguments from those pushing for these policies, it’s worth asking: Are these return-to-office requirements truly justified? Do they actually improve communication, strengthen teams and boost productivity, as supporters claim? According to Kyoung Yong Kim, PhD, whose research focuses on telework, strategic human capital management and employee-organization relationships, the answer is complicated—and highly circumstantial. Dr. Kim says that, by gathering coworkers around the proverbial water cooler, RTO policies can in some cases facilitate dialogue, promote teambuilding and foster organizational success. Yet, in other instances, work-from-home (WFH) arrangements can significantly boost employee morale, efficiency and output. “In a recent paper, my colleague Ijeoma Ugwuanyi [a professor at Hong Kong Metropolitan University] and I examined how social distancing initiatives, which reduce interactions among people, impact working relationships,” says Dr. Kim. “We found that they can actually help improve negative ones, at least in employees’ minds.” Analyzing data collected on 105 working relationships among 43 full-time personnel at a South Korean healthcare company, Dr. Kim and Dr. Ugwuanyi discovered that, when afforded extended WFH privileges, colleagues previously at odds were given the space necessary to reassess their outlooks and improve their dynamics—especially when the individuals involved were viewed as competent and warm. As a result, these repaired relationships generally empowered more effective collaboration in the long run. Additionally, employees with positive in-person relationships maintained a solid rapport even when geographically apart. “These findings are particularly relevant as corporate and government workers increasingly return to their offices,” says Dr. Kim. “Managers need to remember that, according to the research, employees are willing to reset negative relationships they had previously. That said, returning to the office also offers a chance to strengthen relationships and make them more positive, which is crucial since team dynamics are a key determinant of team performance.” Per Dr. Kim, in order to best position themselves for success on the RTO front, organizations need to take a measured, sympathetic approach in facilitating their in-office policies, with an eye toward mitigating negativity. They need to remain cognizant of the logistical and interpersonal challenges that could emerge in the wake of a return, address their employees’ concerns in an attentive manner and foster a “supportive climate characterized by supportive behaviors.” It’s a situation that Dr. Kim says bears parallels—perhaps somewhat counterintuitively—to the mass shift to telework that occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic. As he found in his research on that phenomenon, employees responded best to changes in their working arrangements when organizational leaders and managers took the time to explain and actively discuss the reasoning behind them, especially in mission-driven terms. “Essentially, an important implication of the findings is that, to sustain employees’ positive attitudes and behaviors, it is crucial to frame these moves in a way that highlights how working in the office benefits both employees and the organization,” says Dr. Kim. In turn, RTO-focused organizations should recognize that their words and messages have a very real impact, particularly when scrutinized by workers who may not be happy about resuming their morning commutes. “Amazon, for instance, appears to be taking a thoughtful approach by emphasizing the value of collaboration with colleagues and the enrichment of organizational culture,” says Dr. Kim. “One potential drawback, however, lies in their message about the consequences of non-compliance, specifically that failure to adhere to the in-office policy could jeopardize employees’ chances of promotion. “A more positive framing, emphasizing how such policies support professional growth as well as employees’ well-being, could enhance favorable perceptions and work behaviors.” In the event organizations remain attuned to such situations—taking their employees’ perspectives into account, actively communicating their intentions and presenting clear value propositions—Dr. Kim thinks a year of the RTO mandate could potentially be a less daunting prospect. And maybe, with time, the transition back from Zoom to the boardroom could be a beneficial one.

View all posts
Powered by