The new decade
-
Since so many otherwise intelligent people made snarky remarks about my assertion that the decade begins in 2011, not 2010, I will explain it quite simply as follows: Premise: There are TEN years in a decade Year 1 is the FIRST year of the decade Year 2 is the SECOND year of the decade Year 3 is the THIRD year of the decade . . . Year 9 is the NINTH year of the decade and here's the important part: Year 10 is the TENTH year of the decade, meaning that the new decade doesn't begin until Year 11. That means that 2010 is the TENTH year of the FIRST decade of the 2000's. The second decade will not begin until 2011. Arthur C. Clarke knew the truth, and that is why he named his book 2001 A Space Odyssey, not 2000 A Space Odyssey
Decade - from Merriam Webster Online Dictionary
1 : a group or set of 10: as a : a period of 10 years b : a division of the rosary that consists primarily of 10 Hail Marys
2 : a ratio of 10 to 1 : order of magnitudeTechnically, you can start where ever you want its just a group of 10. I blame VH1 for all the confusion, damn I love the 80's...
Ennis Ray Lynch, Jr. wrote:
Unpaid overtime is slavery.
Trollslayer wrote:
Meetings - where minutes are taken and hours are lost.
-
Richard Andrew x64 wrote:
People didn't walk around saying March 1, 0.
Hmm. The year before that, (or even one or two years before March 1, 1), they weren't saying March 1, -1 either. Does that prove anything? :|
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [Why QA sucks] [My Articles]
Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to all.
Luc Pattyn wrote:
Does that prove anything?
You are correct. What you have said proves absolutely nothing.
-
People didn't walk around saying March 1, 1 either, they thought it was 753AUC or something like that
Well, the first Christians walked around saying it was year 1.
-
The world is full of people who believe incorrect things. When he says that mathematics is subject to individualism, he's wrong. When he implies that just because lots of people believe the wrong thing, that that makes it true, he's wrong again.
And when he makes the argument that people didn't count from a year that couldn't have occurred under a calender system which assumed it to be a few hundred years in the past they're what exactly? Simply put, 90-99, the 90s, a decade, and some basic sense of organization. That said, there are two decades difference between my sisters and myself, those two did not start on a 0 or a 1, and yet, they were still decades as it was two sets of ten distinct years between us. It's an arbitrary grouping of ten years, not something cast in stone set since the beginning of us bothering to measure time.
-
Richard Andrew x64 wrote:
People didn't walk around saying March 1, 0.
Hmm. The year before that, (or even one or two years before March 1, 1), they weren't saying March 1, -1 either. Does that prove anything? :|
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [Why QA sucks] [My Articles]
Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to all.
No, they were saying something like: It's March the first year of King Richard's reign. Or something like that. Even though King/Queen X hadn't completed the first year of their rule, They were currently IN the FIRST YEAR.
-Sean ---- Fire Nuts
-
But the first year is the first year, i.e. Year 1, NOT year 0. Let's say you have a child who was born 1 Jan 2001. On 1 Jan 2010, they will celebrate their 9th birthday. On that day they will begin their 10th year of life, not their 9th, Even though they are only 9 years old. At the END of 2010 they will have COMPLETED their 10th year. Year 1 = 2001 Year 2 = 2002 ... Year 9 = 2009 Year 10 = 2010. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_zero[^]
-Sean ---- Fire Nuts
Sean Cundiff wrote:
Year 1 = 2001
Year 1 of what? Year 1 of the 21st century was 2000. Year 1 of the 90's was 1990. It was the FIRST 90.
My reality check bounced.
-
harold aptroot wrote:
So why isn't year 0 the first year of the decade?
Whay you can’t divide by zero?
The narrow specialist in the broad sense of the word is a complete idiot in the narrow sense of the word. Advertise here – minimum three posts per day are guaranteed.
-
Dirk Higbee wrote:
You weren't born 1 year old were you?
No, you are not 1 year old, but you are living in your FIRST year. The time you take your first breath is the first second of your year 1, not the first second of your year ZERO. It’s exactly the same with the decades: 1970 is in the 70’s because in the first day of 1970 the seconds of the next 1971 are ticking.
The narrow specialist in the broad sense of the word is a complete idiot in the narrow sense of the word. Advertise here – minimum three posts per day are guaranteed.
-
Since so many otherwise intelligent people made snarky remarks about my assertion that the decade begins in 2011, not 2010, I will explain it quite simply as follows: Premise: There are TEN years in a decade Year 1 is the FIRST year of the decade Year 2 is the SECOND year of the decade Year 3 is the THIRD year of the decade . . . Year 9 is the NINTH year of the decade and here's the important part: Year 10 is the TENTH year of the decade, meaning that the new decade doesn't begin until Year 11. That means that 2010 is the TENTH year of the FIRST decade of the 2000's. The second decade will not begin until 2011. Arthur C. Clarke knew the truth, and that is why he named his book 2001 A Space Odyssey, not 2000 A Space Odyssey
Depends on the calendar you use. Some start at 0 and some start at 1, as you have explained in some of the above threads. This page has some more info. I would guess the calender that says right now is the year 2009 started at year 1.
-
Sean Cundiff wrote:
Year 1 = 2001
Year 1 of what? Year 1 of the 21st century was 2000. Year 1 of the 90's was 1990. It was the FIRST 90.
My reality check bounced.
Dirk Higbee wrote:
Year 1 of what?
that child's life. the end of which was the 1st birthday AND the beginning of the 2nd year of life.
-Sean ---- Fire Nuts
-
Richard Andrew x64 wrote:
Year 1 is the FIRST year of the decade
Not if you're a Real Programmer :)
Mladen Jankovic wrote:
Not if you're a Real Programmer
No! For example we/the real programmers :-D/ use zero index to access the FIRST element of some array, but it’s still the FIRST not the ZERO element.
The narrow specialist in the broad sense of the word is a complete idiot in the narrow sense of the word. Advertise here – minimum three posts per day are guaranteed.
-
12am to 12:59am is the FIRST hour of the day but it is not 1. It is before 1. Same with the beginning of time.
My reality check bounced.
Dirk Higbee wrote:
12am to 12:59am is the FIRST hour of the day but it is not 1. It is before 1. Same with the beginning of time.
Which is why 2010 is the 10th year of the decade. Not the first of the next decade. QED
-Sean ---- Fire Nuts
-
Well, the first Christians walked around saying it was year 1.
No, they didn't. It took about 1600 years before it was marked as 1[^]
-
That literary dictionary is hardly a mathematical authority. :thumbsdown:
-
Dirk Higbee wrote:
Year 1 of what?
that child's life. the end of which was the 1st birthday AND the beginning of the 2nd year of life.
-Sean ---- Fire Nuts
Sean Cundiff wrote:
the beginning of the 2nd year of life.
And after 6 months the child will only be 1 1/2 still not 2. The child cannot be 2 until that time has passed. If that time has not passed it is not and cannot be.
My reality check bounced.
-
Depends on the calendar you use. Some start at 0 and some start at 1, as you have explained in some of the above threads. This page has some more info. I would guess the calender that says right now is the year 2009 started at year 1.
aspdotnetdev wrote:
Depends on the calendar you use. Some start at 0 and some start at 1
True. If the gregorian calendar started at zero, we wouldn't be having this discussion.
-
aspdotnetdev wrote:
Depends on the calendar you use. Some start at 0 and some start at 1
True. If the gregorian calendar started at zero, we wouldn't be having this discussion.
Agreed.
-
Richard Andrew x64 wrote:
the calendar we use today began at year 1.
I'd like to see that calendar.
My reality check bounced.
Look at the lower right portion of your task bar. :-D ( If you're using Windows. )
-
1970 is in the 70's because it is the FIRST 70.
My reality check bounced.
You're confusing figures of speech with mathematical facts. The truth is that 1970 was the last year of the 6th decade of the 20 century.
-
Since so many otherwise intelligent people made snarky remarks about my assertion that the decade begins in 2011, not 2010, I will explain it quite simply as follows: Premise: There are TEN years in a decade Year 1 is the FIRST year of the decade Year 2 is the SECOND year of the decade Year 3 is the THIRD year of the decade . . . Year 9 is the NINTH year of the decade and here's the important part: Year 10 is the TENTH year of the decade, meaning that the new decade doesn't begin until Year 11. That means that 2010 is the TENTH year of the FIRST decade of the 2000's. The second decade will not begin until 2011. Arthur C. Clarke knew the truth, and that is why he named his book 2001 A Space Odyssey, not 2000 A Space Odyssey
As far as I am concerned (and most other people it would seem), the 1980s ran from 1980 to 1989, the 90s ran from 1990 to 1999 and the noughties from 2000 to 2009. So Jan 1st 2010 is the start of a new decade (the tens?). Surely a 'decade' is just a period of ten years, so I think your argument is flawed - 1995 to 2005 was a decade for example. By your reasoning the decade of the 1990s ran from 1991 to 2000 which, let's face it, is just daft. As for your Arthur C. Clarke assertion, that was an argument about the start of 21st century, which should indeed of been celebrated on Jan 1st 2001 (I'm pretty sure the Victorians got it right and celebrated the start of the 20th century on Jan 1st 1901.)
