The science of leap day

Feb 29, 2024

3 min

John Gizis


The arrival of a leap year brings with it myths, legends and superstitions about its origin. John Gizis, professor of physics and astronomy at the University of Delaware, takes part in a Q&A to share the truth and science behind this “extra” day added to the Gregorian calendar every four years.


Why do we have leap day?

Unfortunately, the amount of time the earth takes to go around the sun is not exactly 365 days. It’s off by about ¼ of a day each year.


It would be hard to have a calendar for 365 ¼ days. When was the extra day added to the calendar?

Julius Caesar introduced the Julian calendar in 46 B.C., which added one extra day every four years. Of course, the year is not exactly 365 ¼ days either, so after a while, that extra time built up. Pope Gregory XIII established the Gregorian calendar [the current calendar] in 1582 to correct the fact that the calendar had gotten off by about 12 days, enough that it was noticeable.


How was it noticeable?

The seasons were gradually shifting, so that what we think of as summertime in the northern hemisphere had gradually become more like autumn. The shortest day of the year is Dec. 21. Basically, the shortest day of the year drifted and eventually was in early December.


How did they institute the reforms?

First, they skipped a couple of weeks, so they returned to the original calendar lining up with the sun and stars as it’s supposed to. Then they instituted a couple of rules to keep this from happening again. Leap year happens in years divisible by four, but every 100 years, there is not a leap year. However, every 400 years, you do have a leap year. This happened in the year 2000. And the next time it will happen most of us won’t be around — 2100 will not be a leap year.


What would happen if the extra day had not been introduced?

If we didn’t have it at all, we would be off by ¼ of a day every year. The seasons would completely shift through the calendar and anything that ties to the seasons would be affected, like farming. It would create havoc with the time to plant and to harvest crops, for example. You also would lose the meaning behind sayings such as “April showers bring May flowers.”


Multiply the 2,000 years since it was introduced by ¼ day per year, and that would be 500 days we would have shifted over history. In the northern hemisphere January would have become summer, then gone back to being winter, then shifted off again.


Does adding the extra day make up the difference exactly and keep the astral year in sync with the calendar year?

Yes, but this relates to a bigger issue. Astronomers want time to match up so that the positions of the stars match up year after year. Because the length of day changes slightly over time, astronomers sometimes would like to add an extra “leap second” to keep the stars in sync with our time system. But adding a second is an annoyance for computer and tech systems.


Did you know that people born on leap day are sometimes called “leaplings?” According to Google, in 2020, there were about 5 million people with Feb. 29 birthdays. Do you think they have any advantages or disadvantages to being born on this day?

No, I didn’t know that, and I know someone who refused to be induced on that day because she didn’t want confusion for her child, although I think it might be cool. After all, in this day and age, everyone always knows how old they are.


To set up an interview with Gizis, visit his profile and click on the contact button.

Connect with:
John Gizis

John Gizis

Professor, Physics and Astronomy

Prof. Gizis focuses his research on improving the understanding of stars and brown dwarfs (failed stars).

Brown Dwarfs and BinariesCool StarsStarsSolar SystemCosmology

You might also like...

Check out some other posts from University of Delaware

1 min

Can AI save our oyster reefs? A team of scientists put it to the test

With global oyster populations having declined by more than 85% from historical levels, restoring and monitoring these critical ecosystems is more urgent than ever. But traditional monitoring methods aren’t cutting it. A team of researchers that included the University of Delaware's Art Trembanis have taken a new approach, testing an AI model designed to recognize live oysters from underwater images. The findings? The AI model, called ODYSSEE, was faster than human experts and non-expert annotators, processing in just 40 seconds what took humans up to 4.5 hours. But it wasn’t yet as accurate. In fact, the tool misidentified more live oysters than both groups of human annotators. Still, the team found that ODYSEE has real potential to monitor reefs in real time. Why does this matter? As climate change, pollution and overharvesting continue to pressure coastal environments, more precise and non-invasive monitoring tools like ODYSSEE could become essential to restoration efforts and environmental policy. Trembanis can discuss this new tool and its ability to identify live oysters without disturbing the reef. His expertise in oceanography, engineering and robotics expertise was key to the team's work. The results, published in the journal Frontiers, offer both caution and hope in the race to improve ocean monitoring with emerging technologies. To set up an interview with Trembanis, visit his profile and click on the contact button.

2 min

A path to fair minerals trade: Researcher champions global trust model

As the world races to build cleaner energy systems and powerful AI technologies, the demand for critical minerals—like lithium, cobalt, and rare earths—is soaring. But with this demand comes rising global tension over who controls these resources. University of Delaware Professor Saleem Ali, an international expert in environmental policy and chair of UD's Department of Geography and Spatial Sciences, is suggesting a new way forward. In a new article published in Science, along with a United Nations policy brief, Ali and his coauthors propose the creation of a Global Minerals Trust. The article notes how the international plan would help countries work together to manage and share critical minerals fairly and sustainably—avoiding political fights, price shocks and environmental damage. “Without a shared framework, we risk deepening global inequalities, triggering unnecessary resource conflicts and undermining our ability to deliver on climate goals,” says Ali, who also leads the Critical Minerals and Inclusive Energy Transition program at the United Nations University Institute for Water, Environment and Health. The proposed Trust would use independent checks—similar to those used in nuclear safety—to make sure countries are meeting environmental and social standards. Each nation would keep control of its own resources but agree to prioritize sales of those minerals at market prices so that they can be used for clean energy infrastructure. The article builds on a TED Talk that Ali gave last year as part of the Rockefeller Foundation's "Big Bets" initiative. Ali is available for interviews on the topic and can be reached by clicking on his profile.

1 min

Will AI undermine or support writing and critical thinking?

As artificial intelligence reshapes the way we write and think, a central question emerges: Is AI helping or hindering our ability to engage in independent, critical thought? Joshua Wilson, professor of education at the University of Delaware, investigates this topic in a new paper that examines the risks of AI dependency and discusses the need for AI literacy in education. Wilson explores how AI impacts cognitive development through writing — highlighting both the promise and peril of AI-powered tools like ChatGPT. His expertise centers on how these tools interact with foundational models of writing and learning and what that means for education, workforce readiness and civic engagement. In his new paper, Wilson warns that while AI can support higher-order thinking by automating basic writing mechanics, it also risks eroding critical thinking if students and professionals come to rely on it uncritically. He is a leading advocate for AI literacy in education – training individuals not just to use AI, but to think with it. Wilson is available for interviews with reporters, particularly those covering the intersection of AI, education and society and investigating the risks of cognitive offloading in an AI-saturated world. To reach Wilson directly, visit his profile and click on the contact button.

View all posts