The new decade
-
Frankly, I think "the nineties" refers to 1990 to 1999. Maybe that's subjective. But there's no question about the fact that the first year of the 9th decade (of the 20th century) was 1991, just like the first year of the 20th century was 1901, and just like the first year of the 1st century was 1 A.D. No year zero.
-
Richard Andrew x64 wrote:
How many years in a decade? A. 10
Starting at 5 what are the years numbered as? 5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14 The decade begins and ends with your reference.
My reality check bounced.
-
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 the 21st century was 2000.
It was not. You seem to be trying very hard to be ignorant, or it just comes amazingly easy to you.
Michael Martin Australia "I controlled my laughter and simple said "No,I am very busy,so I can't write any code for you". The moment they heard this all the smiling face turned into a sad looking face and one of them farted. So I had to leave the place as soon as possible." - Mr.Prakash One Fine Saturday. 24/04/2004
-
Nemanja Trifunovic wrote:
There was 1 BC, and after that 1 AD. No zeroes there Smile
But 1BC to 1AD is two years so the zero is implied
The zero may have been implied, but as it had not been invented back then... So... a) you're wrong, b) supported by most people who are also wrong, and c) also well aware of this fact, and teasing people (I hope!) Iain. ps, Just to complicate things, I think changes to and from Gregorian, days shifted about in the dark ages, and the supposed fact of Jesus being born in 4bc (or was it 4ad?) make this all highly meaningless anyway! [*] Iain. [*] ie, perfect lounge material!
I have now moved to Sweden for love (awwww).
-
http://www.hermetic.ch/cal_stud/cal_art.html[^] The system of numbering years A.D. (for "Anno Domini") was instituted in about the year 527 A.D. by the Roman abbot Dionysius Exiguus, who reckoned that the Incarnation of Jesus had occurred on March 25 in the year 754 a.u.c., with his birth occurring nine months later. Thus the year 754 a.u.c. was designated by him as the year 1 A.D. It is generally thought that his estimate of the time of this event was off by a few years (and there is even uncertainty as to whether he identified 1 A.D. with 754 a.u.c. or 753 a.u.c.). The question has been raised as to whether the first Christian millennium should be counted from 1 A.D. or from the year preceding it. According to Dionysius the Incarnation occurred on March 25th of the year preceding 1 A.D. (with the birth of Jesus occurring nine months later on December 25th), so it is reasonable to regard that year, rather than 1 A.D. as the first year of the Christian Era. In that case 1 A.D. is the second year, and 999 A.D. is the 1000th year, of the first Christian millennium, implying that 1999 A.D. is the final year of the second Christian millennium and 2000 A.D. the first year of the third.
Nice... The first time I've seen an argument for 2000 being the start of a millenium rather than the end that did not depend on people being morons and going "duh, 10 is a round number..." Iain.
I have now moved to Sweden for love (awwww).
-
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
I agree that the centuries end on xx00. 1901 was the first year of the 20th century. 2000 was the last year of the 20th century. 2001 was the first year of the 21st century. 2100 will be the last year of the 21st century. When people talk about the 19th century, they are talking about the 1800's. When it comes to decades, you define it however the CUSTOMER wants to... I just hope our future generations of programmers can solve the 2100 leap year dilemma before it hits. We kind of lucked out in 2000 since it followed the 400 year exception. My guess is that in the U.S., the Congress will declare that 2100 MUST be a leap year even though the calendar rules say that it is not. It looks like Outlook handles this correctly. It is also good to know that my Monday morning reminders are already scheduled for March 1, 2100 which is the day after February 28, 2100.
-
I think you got that reversed. Centuries begin at 1, otherwise when did the first century start? Year 0? No such thing -- The year before 1 A.D. is 1 B.C. No year zero.
The last year of the 19th century was 1899. The first year of the 20th century was 1900. When runners are all lined up to race the clock is set at zero. When you were born the minutes of your life started ticking, from zero.
My reality check bounced.
-
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
-
Dirk Higbee wrote:
Year 1 of the 21st century was 2000.
It was not. You seem to be trying very hard to be ignorant, or it just comes amazingly easy to you.
Michael Martin Australia "I controlled my laughter and simple said "No,I am very busy,so I can't write any code for you". The moment they heard this all the smiling face turned into a sad looking face and one of them farted. So I had to leave the place as soon as possible." - Mr.Prakash One Fine Saturday. 24/04/2004
Michael Martin wrote:
You seem to be trying very hard to be ignorant, or it just comes amazingly easy to you.
Not at all. This goes way beyond your simple math. Everything starts at zero, whether you 'say it' or not. Before you were born the clock was sitting at zero, then started ticking the minutes of your life. Same with everything else. It all has to start from zero in the beginning. And yes year 1 of the 21st century was 2000 just as 1900 was year 1 of the 20th century. To understand what I am getting at here you have to go deeper. Think of -0. (and don't say no such thing, because there is)
My reality check bounced.
-
Year 1 started back when the aliens crashed at Roswell didn't it? So 2010 will actually be something like 60aac (60 or so years After Alien Crash) That will change depending on whether or not the stores aren't making enough money during daylight savings. They will most likely have to refer to it as 60aac daylight spending, that way we can all stock up for the end of the world in 62aac roughly (a.k.a 2012). After that year 1 will start again 1 year later and will be known as 1awwd (1 year After We Were Duped). The only logical thing to do here is forget all the nonsense and focus on what's really happening in the world. It certainly has nothing to do with what year it is. Aliens, decade 1's and 0's, end of the world, all good to keep your mind occupied while the real world continues to dupe us. Year 0 is now. It's also tomorrow. Peace all. Happy year 0.
-
Nemanja Trifunovic wrote:
There was 1 BC, and after that 1 AD. No zeroes there Smile
But 1BC to 1AD is two years so the zero is implied
ChrisBraum wrote:
But 1BC to 1AD is two years
Nope, one year. After Dec 31st 1 BC comes January 1st 1 AD. There is 1 year between i.e. Jun 1st 1 BC and Jun 1st 1 AD
-
Look, open your mind instead of just defending your position: Here's a bunch of years:
1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10 11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20 21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30You'll notice that there are TEN years in each group. That means each group is a decade. Now what year begins the second decade that I have listed above? Notice that at the beginning of my "calendar" is year 1 because the calendar we use today began at year 1.No, the calendar we use today did not begin at year 1. The calendar we use today began at year 1582. [^]
-
Decades are determined by their time periods, i.e. the 30's. 40's and 50's. Certainly 1970 is not part of the 60's or it wouldn't have a seven in it. And by the way, the beginning of time did start at zero or we wouldn't count time the way we do today. The beginning of time was the first year but it was not a whole year until a year had past. At six months it would have been year .5. :-D
My reality check bounced.
-
maybe not, but what authority do you show (my understanding agrees with yours, but I can't give a reference) Is it possible that the first decade only had 9 years? :wtf:
Opacity, the new Transparency.
-
Look at the lower right portion of your task bar. :-D ( If you're using Windows. )
I can't believe there is even a debate on this. It's pretty common knowledge, and I didn't know there were people out there that believed this. How can anyone even be involved with computers, let alone programming and not know that when you count out ten digits you start with 0?! To put your own arguement to it: 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 That's how computers do it because that is what makes sense and what is logical. The whole 1BC and 1AD arguement is lame because each one took 365 days to complete. That passage of time was called 1AD but it did indeed start with zero. BTW - Arthur C. Clarke must have realized his folly calling it 2001 instead of 2000 because his sequel was called 2010 and not 2011.
-
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
-
Looking at the right portion of my task bar (Windows 7 / fr-FR) : - Current month is december 2009 (Click) -> Switched to year view 2009 (Click) -> Switched to decade view (2000-2009) (Click) -> Switched to century view (2000-2099) and decade are ([2000-2009],[2010,2019]...,[2090,2099] So?
-
nice. Kind of puts the nail in the coffin of 'ol Richard's argument. Now the question is, will he go on believing what he does, thus we continue to avoid his programming?
-
ChrisBraum wrote:
But 1BC to 1AD is two years
Nope, one year. After Dec 31st 1 BC comes January 1st 1 AD. There is 1 year between i.e. Jun 1st 1 BC and Jun 1st 1 AD
Nemanja Trifunovic wrote:
Nope, one year. After Dec 31st 1 BC comes January 1st 1 AD. There is 1 year between i.e. Jun 1st 1 BC and Jun 1st 1 AD
That's interesting! Where can I info on this?
-
Nemanja Trifunovic wrote:
Nope, one year. After Dec 31st 1 BC comes January 1st 1 AD. There is 1 year between i.e. Jun 1st 1 BC and Jun 1st 1 AD
That's interesting! Where can I info on this?
