Re: An answer to what is the first year of the next century.

Article View: alt.folklore.computers

Article #340

Back to alt.folklore.computers Previous Next

#340

From: mrch... Matt Richards
Date: Tue, 19 Dec 1989 01:56

26 lines
1434 bytes

dodson@mozart.uucp (Dave Dodson) writes:

> mrch...@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Matt Richards ) writes:
>>Why is everyone tinkering with the end years?  Can't we
>>just define 1 _BC_ to be the first year, since there
>>was no 0?  That would put everything in sync (for AD
>>at least :-).

>Why do you think having 2000 as the last year of
>the second second millennium AD is out of sync?
>It seems perfectly reasonable to me.
>And why mess things for BC up when there is no need?


If one wants 1000 years in each and every millenium, and
there was no year zero, and one wants last years of millenia
to have the same thousands digit as all of the other years
of the same millenium, then 1 BC should be defined as 
year zero (milleniumwise :-).


-- 
Matt Richards    WILL-AM/FM/TV      Urbana, IL
Center for Trivial Systems Research, University of Illinois
mrch...@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu
"That's not a mistake, that's our system!"

Technical Details

Message-ID: <1989Dec19.015638.14533@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>

Path: mbox-mo1.pugleaf.net!gmdzi!unido!mcsun!uunet!deimos!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!mrchards

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

Path: mbox-mo1.pugleaf.net!gmdzi!unido!mcsun!uunet!deimos!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!mrchards
From: mrch...@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Matt Richards )
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
Subject: Re: An answer to what is the first year of the next century.
Message-ID: <1989Dec19.015638.14533@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>
Date: 19 Dec 89 01:56:38 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Lines: 26
Posted: Tue Dec 19 02:56:38 1989
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit