Will we ever adjust the "zero-year" of our calendar? What's a good alternative?

[Stargate525]

edit. i notice the OP said nothing about accommodating the insecurities of every human being who ever lived on Earth or who is alive at this moment. they just said "more universal" and "less divisive" which are apparently trigger words for people whining about political correctness. i'm sure not every person in the world approved countries giving women the right to vote, but it certainly hasn't led to us becoming mock-robots

divisive to WHOM?! WHO is running around being offended by our CALENDAR?

And running a simple cost-benefit, you'd be hard pressed to find something valuable enough to render every electronic device, our satellites, timetables, markets, textbooks, some of our watches in need of, at best, a software patch and, at worst, total replacement.

[Accelerando]

And running a simple cost-benefit, you'd be hard pressed to find something valuable enough to render every electronic device, our satellites, timetables, markets, textbooks, some of our watches in need of, at best, a software patch and, at worst, total replacement.

truth. requiring an update of all records currently used for stuff

divisive to WHOM?! WHO is running around being offended by our CALENDAR?

not sure. other nations seems like a reasonable starting point - if, say, hypothetically it came down to a global semi-popular vote, with each country serving in the role of kind of "senator", so pure population numbers don't factor in as much. maybe a unanimous vote would be required. true it would encourage short term debate, but in the long term may be less divisive should it come to pass; as for it to do so it will require all nations to agree on the standard. what do you think?

although yeah, you can just gibber about it with big capital letters too.

[vger]

Switching from BC/AD to BCE/CE struck me as silly to begin with. Do they think anybody doesn't know where the numbering originates from because they stuck that little fig leaf over it? Some things are just artifacts of history. Should we also change the names of the days of the week because many of them are named after gods?

From what I've been able to gather, it's only politically correct to be offended by non-destructive religious behaviors, if the originator of the behavior is Christian.

And... wow... remember Y2K? And that was only an issue for time-keeping objects that have been created within the last 20 years or so. Can you imagine changing the temporal point of reference for EVERYTHING that exists in the modern world? The very notion of doing so is just begging for chaos.

Edited March 23, 2014 by vger

[Stargate525]

not sure. other nations seems like a reasonable starting point - if, say, hypothetically it came down to a global semi-popular vote, with each country serving in the role of kind of "senator", so pure population numbers don't factor in as much. maybe a unanimous vote would be required. true it would encourage short term debate, but in the long term may be less divisive should it come to pass; as for it to do so it will require all nations to agree on the standard. what do you think?

although yeah, you can just gibber about it with big capital letters too.

Good to know that Mr. Slippery Slope Fallacy apparently has no problems with Ad Hominems.

If it came down to a sentatorial vote, requiring unanimity?

-You'd have a hell of a time getting North Korea, Uganda, Iran, Venezuela, Pakistan, the DRC to even talk to you.

-Somehow I doubt you'd be able to get Vatican's approval, assuming you take UN observer status and general recognition of statehood.

-The US hasn't converted to Metric. Good luck on a sweeping date change.

-Who decides the new standard? That will be the overriding factor of any proposal and its likelihood of passing.

-You'll raise arguments on the method, as you have given equal representation to 1.5 billion Chinese and 32,000 Liechtensteiners.

-Who will oversee vote fraud? Who will ensure that the individual countries hold a vote at all?

And you didn't answer my question, really. I asked who is getting their knickers in a twist about the Gregorian dating system. You basically said 'Well, people in Not-America' (I'm assuming you're American. If not, then it's 'well, people in Not-[Your country]).

I think there's some burden of proof on this that the dating system is actually a problem.

[Accelerando]

Good to know that Mr. Slippery Slope Fallacy apparently has no problems with Ad Hominems.

truth. there's my flaw ^^ sorry

If it came down to a sentatorial vote, requiring unanimity?

-You'd have a hell of a time getting North Korea, Uganda, Iran, Venezuela, Pakistan, the DRC to even talk to you.

-Somehow I doubt you'd be able to get Vatican's approval, assuming you take UN observer status and general recognition of statehood.

-The US hasn't converted to Metric. Good luck on a sweeping date change.

-Who decides the new standard? That will be the overriding factor of any proposal and its likelihood of passing.

-You'll raise arguments on the method, as you have given equal representation to 1.5 billion Chinese and 32,000 Liechtensteiners.

-Who will oversee vote fraud? Who will ensure that the individual countries hold a vote at all?

And you didn't answer my question, really. I asked who is getting their knickers in a twist about the Gregorian dating system. You basically said 'Well, people in Not-America' (I'm assuming you're American. If not, then it's 'well, people in Not-[Your country]).

I think there's some burden of proof on this that the dating system is actually a problem.

truth. there's no vocal movement for it afaik aside from in science fiction books like Charles Stross's work where timescales are counted in kilo, mega, gigaseconds etc. not much traction, indeed

as for the nation things, unanimity, yes, it would require overcoming many diplomatic and cultural challenges, and ensuring democratic participation and lack of corruption, which for some countries would be a cultural transformation in itself, perpetrated by who-knows-who, edit along with some better way to normalize voting power. however, this is already a hypothetical case where it would be actually worthwhile to make this shift for economic reasons, so it's already pretty removed from reality ^^

Edited March 23, 2014 by Accelerando

[Stargate525]

truth. there's my flaw ^^ sorry

truth. there's no vocal movement for it afaik aside from in science fiction books like Charles Stross's work where timescales are counted in kilo, mega, gigaseconds etc. not much traction, indeed

as for the nation things, unanimity, yes, it would require overcoming many diplomatic and cultural challenges, and ensuring democratic participation and lack of corruption, which for some countries would be a cultural transformation in itself, perpetrated by who-knows-who. however, this is already a hypothetical case where it would be actually worthwhile to make this shift for economic reasons, so it's already pretty removed from reality ^^

Well you made me chuckle, at least.

In this hypothetical ballot, might I add a referendum to adopt a planetary constitution and abolishment of national distinction?

[Accelerando]

Well you made me chuckle, at least.

In this hypothetical ballot, might I add a referendum to adopt a planetary constitution and abolishment of national distinction?

yus! and while you're at it, make sure the referendum includes provisions for providing every major city with its own ridiculously huge skyscraper pyramid

and that's a future we can all believe in

[Tiberion]

Wow, someone took my farcical comment about how silly the notion super seriously. This amuses me. Great success!

Seriously though, Human culture is and has been heavily influenced by religion, you're probably going to have to deal with it.

[bsalis]

This should be the new year zero...

1st January 1970

When machines take over the world, they will change it to that. So might as well switch over now and be done with it. Save our new machine overlords the hassle.

[Stargate525]

This should be the new year zero...

1st January 1970

When machines take over the world, they will change it to that. So might as well switch over now and be done with it. Save our new machine overlords the hassle.

An arbitrary point in time chosen based on an operating system? That's retroactive?

[Seret]

Deciding that any particular year should be year 0 is a totally arbitrary decision anyway. The only one with any logical basis would be the day the Big Bang occurred, and that's a completely impractical one for everyday use. Yes, the calendar we use in the west is derived from a Christian one, which is somewhat anachronistic given the general trend to rationalise weights and measures over the last couple of centuries, but so is the rest of our reckoning of time (hours, minutes, etc).

[78stonewobble]

I am a strong supporter of keeping religion out of everything else (as it should be personal), but this one I really do not feel needs changing. Whatever you are going to pick, it will be arbitrary and loaded with some type of political notion, even if only because the event you picked took place at a certain location/country. You will end up with the same problem you started with, and produce a huge amount of work in the process due to the switchover. We can spend that energy and money somewhere else in much more useful ways.

I think the BCE/CE thing is a politically correct attempt to fix something that is not broken - if you truly feel something needs to be done about a seperate state/day to day life and church, please work on the numerous real problems that do still exist in society. To me, it feels like a band-aid on a barely scraped knee while the patient also has appendicitis, delusions and possibly some broken bones.

Pretty much agree with this.

On the other hand... If we ever arrive at a "time", where the starting date of our calendar is THE genuine problem between people, it will be the most peacefull time ever because apparently we will have run out of other things to fight over. That would be cool.

[TerLoki]

I think I remember reading an article that outlined a new calendar based on the Apollo 11 landing, divided into BT and AT (before/after Tranquility). It also changed up the way months and leap years were worked out as well. I need to try and find that again.

[Sirrobert]

truth. there's no vocal movement for it afaik aside from in science fiction books like Charles Stross's work where timescales are counted in kilo, mega, gigaseconds etc. not much traction, indeed

as for the nation things, unanimity, yes, it would require overcoming many diplomatic and cultural challenges, and ensuring democratic participation and lack of corruption, which for some countries would be a cultural transformation in itself, perpetrated by who-knows-who, edit along with some better way to normalize voting power. however, this is already a hypothetical case where it would be actually worthwhile to make this shift for economic reasons, so it's already pretty removed from reality ^^

Well damn. If you can do that, you basicly layed a strong foundation for the Nation of Earth.

That might actually be a good reason to name it year 0

[Skyrunner27]

It is already set at an arbitrary date already that has little political bias besides it was set up by the Church. 1 AD is supposedly 3 year before the birth of Christ and there is the fact that December 25th is the date that Christians celebrate the birth of Christ, not January 1st.

[CaptainKipard]

divisive to WHOM?! WHO is running around being offended by our CALENDAR?.

Er, I'm not sure this is as trivial as you make it out to be. Imagine what would happen a few hundred years ago if someone wanted to remove the references to that guy in the dates.

I for one never liked being reminded of who is in charge here, and this is a welcome change in the zeitgeist.

In this hypothetical ballot, might I add a referendum to adopt a planetary constitution and abolishment of national distinction?

I hope that's a joke.

[vger]

I think I remember reading an article that outlined a new calendar based on the Apollo 11 landing, divided into BT and AT (before/after Tranquility). It also changed up the way months and leap years were worked out as well. I need to try and find that again.

Now would be a good time to propose it. Russia is already acting pretty cranky...

Really, it seems like the ONLY chance of resetting the calendar would be if something happened that affected the whole world in an incredible drastic way. If it were an act by any one nation, everyone else would get jealous and wouldn't want to convert to it. Say, if we got hit by an epic asteroid and entered into one of a billion 'post-apocalyptic' sci-fi novels, that event might serve as a new 'zero.'

The ONLY thing I could see a nation doing that might allow us all to agree on resetting the calendars would be a technology so incredible that it would tear down barriers in every direction it looked. Warp drive, or free energy, or as someone else suggested, a robotics renaissance.

Edited March 23, 2014 by vger

[Stargate525]

Er, I'm not sure this is as trivial as you make it out to be. Imagine what would happen a few hundred years ago if someone wanted to remove the references to that guy in the dates.

I for one never liked being reminded of who is in charge here, and this is a welcome change in the zeitgeist.

So... You? Pissed at the Christians in general over being forced to use 'their' year scheme? Not pissed at the temples of Saturn, Thor, Mondas, Frigg? Let's also conveniently ignore that the other main option would have been to count years based on who was in power at the time. You want to talk about political!

I hope that's a joke.

The two have about equal chance of happening.

It is already set at an arbitrary date already that has little political bias besides it was set up by the Church. 1 AD is supposedly 3 year before the birth of Christ and there is the fact that December 25th is the date that Christians celebrate the birth of Christ, not January 1st.

Wrong direction. Jesus is commonly believed to have been born between 7-3 BC. And until the 18th century a lot of countries DID have the new year fall on Christmas or one of the other festivals.

As it stands, we're basing the new year on the ascension date of the old Roman Consuls.

[Skyrunner27]

Wrong direction. Jesus is commonly believed to have been born between 7-3 BC. And until the 18th century a lot of countries DID have the new year fall on Christmas or one of the other festivals.

As it stands, we're basing the new year on the ascension date of the old Roman Consuls.

I knew I had to make a mistake somewhere. Thanks for the information though.

[Superfluous J]

Humans have no real issues with 4-digit numbers. 5-digit numbers (common for addresses here in the USA) are also no problem. 6 and more can start to get unwieldy.

So in 8000 years we'll still be fine, but in 98,000 years things might get a bit dodgy. Ask again at that time.

[vger]

Wrong direction. Jesus is commonly believed to have been born between 7-3 BC. And until the 18th century a lot of countries DID have the new year fall on Christmas or one of the other festivals.

As it stands, we're basing the new year on the ascension date of the old Roman Consuls.

Heh, yep. Lest we forget that a lot of what we commonly view as Christian traditions are much older. The Roman Catholics had a thing for blending their traditions with the traditions of old in order to ease the assimilation process for other cultures into Christiandom. The birth of Jesus is no exception. Pagan traditions tell tales of each year being the life cycle of a 'king' or other being of stature, as a representation of the annual cycle of death and rebirth. The king was born in the heart of winter (the baby new year), got old, and then died, and the cycle would repeat. If there was an actual Jesus, most records point to his birth being NOWHERE near Christmas. No doubt, Jesus's birthday was moved to December so that Jesus and the Baby New Year would blend into one iconic figure.

Edited March 23, 2014 by vger

[LawnDartLeo]

I posted this on askreddit today, but it got buried quickly. I figured I'd see what you folks thought:

Despite the fact that we've switched (at least in academia) from the BC/AD designation to the BCE/CE designation in an attempt to make it seem like our calendar is not based on a mythological event.

As for me I think you are incredibly disrespectful of others spiritual viewpoints.

Changing it does nothing to simplify anything or unify the grand equation of the world we live in. Heck, while we're at it, lets move the prime meridian, too.

[Javster]

I think 1977 should be year zero... the year star wars was released. Then our dates would be BS and AS (Before Star Wars, After Star Wars). I was born in year 6 AS

Some would say that's total BS (ba-dum-tsss!)

[magnemoe]

You're either trying to troll, or have completely missed the point. I wasn't talking about previous wars. There is no need to change current "zero year". Such need may arise only if there will be some world-wide cataclysm, by its nature dividing the timeline into "before" and "after". WW3, for example.

On the other hand, it may be the day of machine rebellion. Or the day when humans become immortal. Take your pick.

I was joking, on the other hand lots of fantasy universe like Tolkien's and the Elder scroll one uses multiple restart points 1, 2, 3 age and so on, my guess is that this causes more issues than the current system.

[vger]

I was joking, on the other hand lots of fantasy universe like Tolkien's and the Elder scroll one uses multiple restart points 1, 2, 3 age and so on, my guess is that this causes more issues than the current system.

I think calling it an age is what one should do when you hit a point where there are so many years in your history that it has become too long to keep defining it in years. Science has 'eras' at the very least. In most cases it's pointless to say specifically how many millions it is. To just say "Triassic" is sufficient in casual discussion.