A question concerning 21st century:

greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

I know that this question sounds astonishingly stupid,and it in all likelyhood it is. However I am going to ask it, and suffer the wrath that shall fall on my head. Do not feel guilty for thinking me stupid, because with each day even I am amazed at my stupidity. Alright enough on my credibility. Here is the question. All my life all 68 years of it I have always heard that it was the 20th century, however the date was always 1970,80,90,etc. Now that we have stepped through the door of time I hear of the present century as the 21st century, and to me all I see is 2000, where or where does the 21 come in? I always figured that when I had nineteen dollars, it was not 20. Now I am hearing that 20 dollars are actually 21. Please somebody you out there with far more wisdom than mine, explain this perplexing thing to me so that I can sleep well at night, oh the agony of lost sleep.

-- Notforlong (Fsur439@aol.com), January 02, 2000

Answers

Notfor;

2000 is still in the 20th century. It is the last year of the millenium. Next year, 2001, will be the first year of the 21st century.

-- Helium (Heliumavid@yahoo.com), January 02, 2000.


I am aware of that, that what has me so puzzled, I knew I was in the 19th century, not the 20th, however it was called the 20th. I know we are now in the 20th century, not the 21st, however I have already seen newsprint calling this the 21st century. Somesbody's cookies are crumbled or something.

-- Notforlong (Fsur439@aol.com), January 02, 2000.

well when the first century was completed and the date rolled to 101AD one had to call that century the 2nd century because the 1st 100 years was up and the 1st century was not called the ZEROth century! We started counting the centuries starting with the 1st century, not zeroth century.

-- lenny (Chmielecki@worldnet.att.net), January 02, 2000.

Helium is correct but didn't really answer your question. Here's the scoop:

When a baby is born, he's ZERO years old and in his FIRST year. On his FIRST birthday, he is now ONE year old and has started his SECOND year. Likewise, you claim that your are 68 years old, you, therefore, are in your 69th year.

The same then applies to centuries, the years 1-100AD were the first century, 101-200 was the second . . . 1901-2000 is the 20th century and 2001-2100 will be the 21st century.

-- Think It (Through@Pollies.Duh), January 02, 2000.


My explanation also explains why the 21st century does not start until 2001!!

-- lenny (Chmielecki@worldnet.att.net), January 02, 2000.


I'm not sure if the previous answer cleared it up for you, since "2001" is still 20 and yet the 21st century. A little more detail:

Year "00" through "100" were the first 100 years, the 1st century.

Year "101" through "200", the second 100 years, the 2nd century, even though "101" starts with "1", still part of the 2nd century. That's why the 20th century starts with "19" (as of 1901) and the 21st century starts in "2001".

Hope this helps you get some sleep.

-- Tom (tcgmtnman@spiralcomm.net), January 02, 2000.


What is this? A contest to see who can muck up the obvious?

-- lenny (Chmielecki@worldnet.att.net), January 02, 2000.

Here is an even more obscure reason... there is no roman numeral for zero. Hence there could have never been a zero-th centurary when the zero-th century started.

-- Michael Erskine (Osiris@urbanna.net), January 02, 2000.

Hey Tom, why does you first century have 101 years in it?

-- albert tatlock (d@s.j), January 02, 2000.

The "true" starting date of the 21st century is a matter of definition, not logic or mathematics. It's purely arbitrary. The major contenders are the "odometer system" used by most. When all the digits change at once, that's what means something.

The other system is the "Dennis the Short" system. Dennis tried to set up a calendar based on the estimated birth of Christ. He missed Christ's birth by at least 4 years, and he made what computer programmers call an "off-by-one" bug, because he forgot about year 0. Also, of course, we don't know what DAY Christ was born on, though indications are that it was sometime in the spring, and certainly not on either Christmas or January 1. Therefore, exactly 2000 years after Christ's (mistaken) birth year, ignoring his birth DAY, based on Dennis' (mistaken) retrocalculation, causes the new millenium to start at 2001. Talk about arbitrary!

So pick whichever system appeals to you more, or celebrate twice.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), January 02, 2000.



Oh my God I am realy confused now, me thinks I am 69, boy is that going to give the wife a laugh. Of course I can laugh also because we are the same age. My mother gave to me the outside world on Sept 23, 1931, my wife's mother did the same thing to her on Oct., the 17 1931. So we both are living a paradox, when I quote our age, instead of 68, I must now quote us as being 69, simply because we are living in the 69th year. Wow will she love that. We must now alter our life style to fit that of the elderly. You folks have really helped me. Now I can with authority state that I am a total nut. Not only that, but a 69 year old nut born 68 years ago, living in the 21 century, which started two thousand years ago. Oh the agony of lost sleep.

-- Notforlong (Fsur439@aol.com), January 02, 2000.

Notforlong:

I wonder if you (or anyone else) noticed that when Philip Greenspun put numbers on his list of items, the first was number ZERO. Philip is a programmer. The inability to remember that element 3 is the FOURTH element of an array is at the heart of a sizeable percentage of programming errors.

Yes, you started your 69th year the instant you turned 68, just like you started your first year the instant you were born. But that does NOT make you 69 years old today, any more than you were 1 year old at birth.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), January 02, 2000.


Ye gads Flint how can I ever thank you enough, now I can disengage myself from all those elderly folk. I am now young again, oh happy day, now I can sleep with peace. For a while there I was in real trouble who can stand to have old geaser of 69 around. Do you realize that is right next door to that horrible number? Thank you, Thank You Thankkkk Youuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu Oh my god its happening againnnnnnnnnnnn, My finger is aging faster than me.

-- Notforlong (Fsur439@aol.com), January 02, 2000.

I understand your question to be, why do so many people regard the 21st Century as beginning in 2000, when it actually begins in 2001. I'd offer two possible explanations. One, that 2000 feels like the start of a millennium to most people who haven't really thought it through. Two, the year 2000 better serves those who would seek to dramatize the new millennium.

-- David L (bumpkin@dnet.net), January 02, 2000.

LOL!!!!!

-- Kind Words (from@oneanother.com), January 02, 2000.


We all know that $1.43 9/10 at the pump is is NOT $1.44, as it is quoted as $1.43. And $199.95 is NOT $200. Seems that we never liked zeros because we can't handle them. Or someone told us so.

-- W (me@home.now), January 02, 2000.

David L:

As I wrote above, the actual start of the millennium is a matter of arbitrary definition, NOT something to be "thought through". You can pick either system, whichever appeals to you, or you can celebrate both. There is no "right" answer to this one.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), January 02, 2000.


Flint,
You're right. I was trying to say that I would expect a person's first reaction to be to assume that 2000 begins the next millennium, and not to initially realize that it is possible to define a millennium differently.

-- David L (bumpkin@dnet.net), January 02, 2000.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ