Author: Mike Hood
Date: 02:00:15 12/25/99
Go up one level in this thread
On December 24, 1999 at 20:43:24, Charles Unruh wrote: >On December 24, 1999 at 12:52:39, John R. Menke, Sr. wrote: > >>On December 24, 1999 at 12:40:55, Dave Gomboc wrote: >> >>>On December 24, 1999 at 12:00:44, Keith Ian Price wrote: >>> >>>>On December 24, 1999 at 10:38:33, Albert Silver wrote: >>>> >>>>>On December 24, 1999 at 10:09:34, Charles Unruh wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>The millenium does not start till 2001!! 2000 is last year of this millenium. >>>>>> >>>>>>2000 is just the cap, 2001 is the beggining man i want to blow up the world i'm >>>>>>tired of people refusing to acknowledge the obvious ughhh! Merry X-mas >>>>>>>MERRY CHRISTMAS AND HAPPY NEW YEAR! >>>>> >>>>>Only if the calendar started with a 1. If on the other hand Year 1 represented >>>>>the first year to pass (like a baby's first birthday), 2000 is indeed the >>>>>beginning of the second millenium. The debate is in fact all based on this. I >>>>>for one believe that Year 1 was the first year to pass, therefore the year 2000 >>>>>is the beginning of the third millenium after Christ. >>>>> >>>>> Albert Silver >>>> >>>>I must admit I am rather surprised at this statement, Albert. You are normally >>>>quite logical in your premises. Of course the calendar started with 1. People >>>>didn't have computers back then, so starting with 0 didn't make sense to them. >>>>And equally, of course year 1 represented the first year to pass (like a baby's >>>>first birthday), so, of course the millenium starts with 2001. If year 1 was the >>>>first year to pass in the 1st millenium, year 2001 will be the first year to >>>>pass in the third millenium. The New York Times editorial staff is having a >>>>battle over this right now. Their headline on January 1, 1901 was "Welcome to >>>>The 20th Century". Some of the editors want to have a similar "Welcome to the >>>>New Millenium" headline on January 1, 2000. But the others ask how will they >>>>explain the 99-year century? >>>> >>>>kp >>> >>>Maybe the other editors you mention would be good at software development, where >>>details matter. "When to party?" is about as deep as this issue gets, so >>>whatever the answer, it's not going to matter too much. >>> >>>Dave >> >>I tend to concur with Albert and Dave, for no other reason than that's the way I >>like it. Such things are by mutual agreement, or not, and obviously the nots >>have it! Is 10-5=5? That's by mutual agreement too. We could equally well say >>that 10-5=6 because we want it to indicate "inclusiveness", although that would >>upset many mathematical applecarts, require recalculation of the date of the big >>bang, etc. Not that logic matters very much here, it's all for fun, as I see it. >>Cheers! >>--JRM > >The dark ages have returned! Charles, you're entirely right. The new millennium starts on January 1st 2001. On the other hand, January 1st 2000 is the momentous day when all the world's computers will screw up, the power will go out, religious terrorists will assassinate the world's rulers and nuclear missiles will flare across the sky. So let's celebrate the Millennium in 2000 regardless, we may never live to see 2001. Merry Christmas!
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.