Subject:
|
Re: When did the 3rd millennium start?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.geek
|
Date:
|
Tue, 2 Jan 2001 16:10:46 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
910 times
|
| |
|
|
Matthew Miller wrote:
> And changing to this strongly suggests undertaking a renumbering of all
> previous years, because currently, arbitrary or not, there's a smooth
> transition around the starting point, with the year after being 1 CE (or AD)
> and the one before that being 1 BCE (or BC). If you're counting years
> completed, you need a zero (just like people have until their first
> birthday).
No we don't need to renumber all the previous years. We just need to
give the year 1 BC two names. Or we can be non-anal about it and accept
that to the average person, it makes more sense that the millenium
starts in 2000 not 2001.
On the other hand, at this point its pretty irrelevant. We now both
agree that we're in the 3rd millenium and the 21st century, and most
people will refer to the decades by names like "the 80s" which I hope we
can both agree that the most interesting "the 80s" to us right now ran
from 1980-1989. I don't really expect any of us to really care when the
22nd century starts, and we won't care about when the 4th millenium
starts.
--
Frank Filz
-----------------------------
Work: mailto:ffilz@us.ibm.com (business only please)
Home: mailto:ffilz@mindspring.com
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: When did the 3rd millennium start?
|
| (...) Doesn't matter. It's the *2001st* year since we started counting. Not 2000th: I think that's what you're missing. *Last* year was the 2000th year; that's why it was called "2000". (...) Well, as I said in my post, you are *in* your 38th year. (...) (24 years ago, 2-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
57 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
