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

[Guest]

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.

This was based on how Chinese and Japanese used to measure time. By dynasties and emperors. It seems to have worked quite well, and IIRC, Japan still uses it. Though obviously, this is much harder and not as useful these days, because of internationalization and general lack of monarchies.

[CaptainKipard]

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

Respect is earned.

Tolerance is the default.

I think you're confusing the two; most people do.

Also the word "spiritual" has no clear meaning so there's no point using it.

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!

There's so much wrong with that statement I don't even know where to begin.

1. I could be full for days with all the red herrings in there. No one gets emotional over Thorsday either way, perhaps because no one believes in those things anymore.

2. I'm not offended. What I experienced was more a general feeling of dissatisfaction, an disappointment with the human race.

3. the BCE/CE thing is already a compromise. It's not, as you seem to see it, a point for the secularists.

So if there's a compromise on something like this, and certain groups still complain, then..... draw your own conclusions, if you can.

Edited March 24, 2014 by Cpt. Kipard

[Stargate525]

There's so much wrong with that statement I don't even know where to begin.

1. I could be full for days with all the red herrings in there. No one gets emotional over Thorsday either way, perhaps because no one believes in those things anymore.

2. I'm not offended. What I experienced was more a general feeling of dissatisfaction, an disappointment with the human race.

3. the BCE/CE thing is already a compromise. It's not, as you seem to see it, a point for the secularists.

So if there's a compromise on something like this, and certain groups still complain, then..... draw your own conclusions, if you can.

1. The way I see it, if you're going to change the year scheme because it offends your non-religious sensibilities, you must also be in favor of removing every other religious reference from the system, regardless of origin, or be labelled a hypocrite. Unless it's just Christianity you have a beef with.

2. So... who's offended? Why should we change it because a minority just isn't happy?

3. I never mentioned Common Era.

[CaptainKipard]

1. That's too simplistic. I already explained why. The way I see it you've simply ignored it and restated your position. It's a common tactic.

2. I shouldn't have even answered that. The whole offence business was just another red herring of yours, but It speaks to a larger point which I made for you. I could list a bunch of other minorities, to make my point, but I think it suffices to say that truth and righteousness is not democratic. That's something a lot of people have trouble grasping. Popularity doesn't matter; what matters is what argument you can field in support of your position.

3. I'm sorry, I respected you enough to think you were talking on topic. Should I not?

[Stargate525]

1. That's too simplistic. I already explained why. The way I see it you've simply ignored it and restated your position. It's a common tactic.

2. I shouldn't have even answered that. The whole offence business was just another red herring of yours, but It speaks to a larger point which I made for you. I could list a bunch of other minorities, to make my point, but I think it suffices to say that truth and righteousness is not democratic. That's something a lot of people have trouble grasping. Popularity doesn't matter; what matters is what argument you can field in support of your position.

3. I'm sorry, I respected you enough to think you were talking on topic. Should I not?

...Okay.

My position is that the burden of proof is on your side. The cost/benefit of changing the system is greatly in favor of maintaining the status quo. "Because it is right" is a hollow argument, and has no inherent value unless, as I've asked three times now, you can show me people who are meaningfully affected by this. You don't go changing things this big because some people go 'oh, I'm not happy with this.' Is this calendar oppressing people? Is it economically disadvantaging people? Is it, really, benefiting Christians unduly?

If you don't like cost/benefit, then what metric shall we use for our debate? Better yet, give me your counter-proposal, along with the cost/benefit of it, please.

The topic was NEVER 'Is BCE/CE a compromise or a point for the secularists,' it was 'will we adjust the calendar.'

[CaptainKipard]

The difficult I have is that I have to walk a fine line at the cost of clarity. I could succesfully argue for myself but then the topic would be closed and I'd be slapped with a warning, because somehow people got the idea that being critical of some traditions is intolerant and shrill. I think the relevant forum rules shouldn't apply in a SCIENCE section but I don't make the rules.

I'll just say that legitimising any point of view is detrimental to the opposite point of view. You'll need to apply this statement for yourself.

I'll also ask you to figure out what exactly a tradition is, because whatever traditions you're talking about, they are rarely based on objectivity.

[Nuke]

to kind of change the direction of this discussion, i was thinking that the way we measure time, based on the orbital period of the earth or the length of the day is kind of an unstable way to account for time. we know that the day gets shorter as the moon saps the earth of its angular momentum. we know the length of the year fluctuates from orbit to orbit because of the interference from other orbital bodies. then you got relativity in there tweaking the numbers if you use a moving reference point. then what is a second other than a division of a day? it might be better to use a smaller reference and then multiply up, instead of the seemingly regular motion of orbital mechanics (unless you are on mercury). something more predictable like atomic decay. but then an atomic clock at the equator will run slower than one at the poles due to relativistic effects. granted these discrepancies are infinitesimal at our levels or perception, but i have a feeling they will be responsible for many a calendar change in the coming millennia.

then what happens when we start colonizing/terraforming other worlds? it would be somewhat beneficial for those planets to have their own calender. farming on a planet with a 16 hour day and a 277 day year would get very interesting if we kept our legacy earth calender.

[Dodgey]

If it ain't broke..... Just because it has some religious origins doesn't mean anything about what it is now. Take christmas for example, here in Australia no one cares what it's origins are (aside from those of religion), what we care about is that it is a great oppitunity to gather with your family and have an awesome time. It's origins don't matter, and neither do the origins of our current calendar.

[Stargate525]

then what happens when we start colonizing/terraforming other worlds? it would be somewhat beneficial for those planets to have their own calender. farming on a planet with a 16 hour day and a 277 day year would get very interesting if we kept our legacy earth calender.

Not to mention the strange effects on bureaucracy in a relativistic society. For instance, a pilot flies a ten year journey to Alpha Centauri. To him, it only took five years (not right, but using arbitrary numbers as an example). Does he accrue (and therefore owe taxes on) five years of salary, or ten? If a convict serves his term at a high fraction of c, when does he get out? Term limits? Election dates?

[Red Iron Crown]

I don't really care about the zero year, as others have mentioned, it's entirely arbitrary.

I would like to see the World Calendar adopted, though. Equal length quarters, a given date always falls on the same day of the week, and a special "World Day" once a year, twice in leap years (should be a worldwide holiday!). It will never happen due to cultural inertia and the World Days messing with the seven day week that is important to some religions. Nice to dream about, though.

[KOCOUR]

Why fix something thats not broken?

[Comrade Jenkens]

I don't see the need to adjust it because the current system is fine. It doesn't matter which point in time it is and everything is based off the current system.

Changing it would be very difficult for no gain.

[Stargate525]

I don't really care about the zero year, as others have mentioned, it's entirely arbitrary.

I would like to see the World Calendar adopted, though. Equal length quarters, a given date always falls on the same day of the week, and a special "World Day" once a year, twice in leap years (should be a worldwide holiday!). It will never happen due to cultural inertia and the World Days messing with the seven day week that is important to some religions. Nice to dream about, though.

That's actually a very coherent system. I like it. As far as religions... There are only a few die-hard conservative Christian groups (and Catholics, presumably) who would insist on every seventh day without interruption of the leap days. I mean, many denominations already run services on Wednesday, Thursday, Saturday, Sunday...

[Red Iron Crown]

That's actually a very coherent system. I like it. As far as religions... There are only a few die-hard conservative Christian groups (and Catholics, presumably) who would insist on every seventh day without interruption of the leap days. I mean, many denominations already run services on Wednesday, Thursday, Saturday, Sunday...

Not just Christians would oppose it, I'm afraid. The Sabbath on Saturday for Jews and the Jumu'ah every Friday for Muslims.

[Stargate525]

Not just Christians would oppose it, I'm afraid. The Sabbath on Saturday for Jews and the Jumu'ah every Friday for Muslims.

Fair point, but as a doctrinally-trained Christian, I can only speak with any sort of authority on my side of the debate.

[Seret]

I don't see the need to adjust it because the current system is fine.

No, the current system is weird and ridiculous. We're just really comfortable with it. I agree that there's no pressing need to change, but only because we gain less from shifting to something more logical than the disruption would cause. Applications where logical systems are required (such as computing) already use another system, so the technical issues are already sorted.

It would be nice to have a better system, but it isn't particularly necessary.

[CaptainKipard]

The way I see it the only way a new year zero will be chosen is if something momentous happens, like a meeting with aliens, or a massive war that nearly destroys humanity. None of those seem likely at the moment.

Edited March 24, 2014 by Specialist290
Nothing to see here...

[Dispatcher]

The way I see it the only way a new year zero will be chosen is if something momentous happens, like a meeting with aliens, or a massive war in which theocratic forces are beaten. None of those seem likely at the moment.

Theocratic forces? Last time I checked, most wars tend to be fought over the control of resources (or the defense of that control), regardless of other rationale.

[Comrade Jenkens]

No, the current system is weird and ridiculous

What's weird and ridiculous about it? Its just one arbitrary point in time the same as any other. We've just happened to have chosen that spot.

[Seret]

What's weird and ridiculous about it? Its just one arbitrary point in time the same as any other. We've just happened to have chosen that spot.

Exactly, the years are based on an arbitrary point. They're also not the same length as an actual year, the months don't match anything in particular, and a week totally arbitrary. A day isn't 24 hours long, and why 24 hours anyway? 60 minutes with 60 seconds is based on a counting system from the dawn of time. It's a hell of a mess, none of it actually makes any sense.

[jwenting]

Why fix something thats not broken?

it's old, it has to be bad.

was signed, your average 15 year old gamer who thinks he's a scientist because he's watched a youtube outtake of a Mythbusters episode.

[metl]

For something that has been in use for 2000+ years, and effectively, referring to it as a mess that makes no sense is not all that accurate. I understand people's view on the whole religion thing, but let's not get stupid. The amount of religious references in our world are astronomical. If we change the calendar, then the days, and months, then we would have to rename the planets, plus rockets, ships, chemicals, basically everything in our entire knowledge because all of it somehow links to a religion of some sort somewhere. Just how far should we go? Or is it just Christianity that we should be against?

[Red Iron Crown]

One bad thing about the current system is there is no year 0. 10BC to 10AD is only 19 years, which strikes me as idiotic.

[vger]

For something that has been in use for 2000+ years, and effectively, referring to it as a mess that makes no sense is not all that accurate. I understand people's view on the whole religion thing, but let's not get stupid. The amount of religious references in our world are astronomical. If we change the calendar, then the days, and months, then we would have to rename the planets, plus rockets, ships, chemicals, basically everything in our entire knowledge because all of it somehow links to a religion of some sort somewhere. Just how far should we go? Or is it just Christianity that we should be against?

Yeah, I guess it's a good thing nobody named one of the planets Yahweh, or people would be campaigning to change it now. Venus, Mars, Neptune... they can all stick around though.

Theocratic forces? Last time I checked, most wars tend to be fought over the control of resources (or the defense of that control), regardless of other rationale.

Shhh.. you're going to annoy the anti-theists. Religion has to be the root of all evil in humanity, because... I dunno... they spoke out against Origin of the Species and they also killed people regularly in an era when it was normal to kill people regularly.

Edited March 24, 2014 by vger

[Stargate525]

Exactly, the years are based on an arbitrary point.

And changing that won't be any less arbitrary.

They're also not the same length as an actual year,

Which is, unfortunately, not blessed with a preponderance of clean factors to divide it.

the months don't match anything in particular,

Yea, though most cultures seem to have adopted a calendar with around 12 divisions... If I would hazard a guess; four seasons, with an early, middle, and late division?

a week totally arbitrary.

The number seven holds great significance to Judaic and Middle Eastern cultures, which is where we picked up the majority of our time system. See below.

A day isn't 24 hours long, and why 24 hours anyway?

4 times 6. See below.

60 minutes with 60 seconds is based on a counting system from the dawn of time.

Yup, and a damned efficient one too. Base six allows you to count every integer from one to 35 on your fingers. VERY useful for keeping track of stuff if you, for instance, would otherwise have to chisel notes into a clay tablet. Babylon and Sumeria were the first cultures to really divide time, record it in a way that carried, and conquered enough other cultures that it stuck.

It's a hell of a mess, none of it actually makes any sense.

Makes perfect sense. Enjoy your history.