HeadCone 0 #126 January 7, 2010 QuoteWe need a bonafide historian that knows about the shift from roman numerals to the hindu arabic system that happened just over 1000 years ago. The answer to this debate really depends on whether or not the people that were resposasble for the 'changover' allowed for this factor. I believe the zero was so important to them at the time, that they would have. But that is just a guess. A queston for you skittles, if the year 'zero' was not allowed for, when a scientist talks about BP (before present) what happens to that year? You were not 1 year old until you had lived for a year, we use that numbering system for dates, the symbols 2010 are hindu arabic, so wouldn't the symbols be consistent when counting backawards from now until a point before christ? I'm no "bonafide historian", but here's what I've learned: It seems that Dionysius Exiguus is responsible for our year numbering. In 525 AD, he came up with a table of Easter Sunday dates which had years that were based on Anni Domini Nostri Jesu Christi (the year of our Lord Jesus Christ). Later, in 731 AD, the Venerable Bede finished writing "Ecclesiastical History of the English People." In this history, he used years that were based on Anno Domini and "Ante Vero Incarnationis Dominicae Tempus" (the time before the Lord's true incarnation) and did not use a year 0. Afterwards, this system of numbering the years became popular in Western Europe and is now the defacto standard. For yet another link, here's what the U.S. Navy has to say on the matter: http://aa.usno.navy.mil/faq/docs/millennium.php-- Turn off the internet! Join Citizens United Negating Technology For Life And People's Safety! http://www.citizensunitednegatingtechnology.org/ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BillyVance 34 #127 January 7, 2010 Quote Quote fuck, i'm old. I was in HIGH SCHOOL when you were born. argh. *bangs head on desk* That's not old. Being 90 and pooping your pants is old My mom is freaking about me turning 20 this year, though. Says she's officially going to be an old lady when that happens. I cant help but laugh at her. She'll be 41. I'm older than she is. "Mediocre people don't like high achievers, and high achievers don't like mediocre people." - SIX TIME National Champion coach Nick Saban Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
HeadCone 0 #128 January 7, 2010 QuoteQuoteFor example, from the time a person is born until their first birthday, yes, they would be 0 years old (if you were giving their age in years instead of the more normal days/months). On their first birthday, they turn 1. They're not ZERO years old in any respect there IS NO zero years If a baby is 1 day old and you were forced to use whole number years to tell his/her age, I think you'd have to say zero. If you could use a decimal number but were still forced to use years as the unit of measure, then, assuming a year to be 365.25 days, a 1 day old baby would be approximately 0.0027378507871321013004791238877481 years old. This is age (measure of length of time) were talking about. Although there is no Year 0 in the Anno Domini system, zero years is a perfectly valid length of time.-- Turn off the internet! Join Citizens United Negating Technology For Life And People's Safety! http://www.citizensunitednegatingtechnology.org/ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Squeak 17 #129 January 7, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteFor example, from the time a person is born until their first birthday, yes, they would be 0 years old (if you were giving their age in years instead of the more normal days/months). On their first birthday, they turn 1. They're not ZERO years old in any respect there IS NO zero years If a baby is 1 day old and you were forced to use whole number years to tell his/her age, I think you'd have to say zero. If you could use a decimal number but were still forced to use years as the unit of measure, then, assuming a year to be 365.25 days, a 1 day old baby would be approximately 0.0027378507871321013004791238877481 years old. NOPE They're not ZERO years old in any respect there IS NO zero years. You cant just make it up, the idjits who try to just make themselves look silly. There IS NO zero yearsYou are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky) My Life ROCKS! How's yours doing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Squeak 17 #130 January 7, 2010 Quote There IS NO zero years I stand corrected, there is a Year Zero, It's HERE, and only hereYou are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky) My Life ROCKS! How's yours doing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
HeadCone 0 #131 January 7, 2010 Quote Quote Quote Quote For example, from the time a person is born until their first birthday, yes, they would be 0 years old (if you were giving their age in years instead of the more normal days/months). On their first birthday, they turn 1. They're not ZERO years old in any respect there IS NO zero years If a baby is 1 day old and you were forced to use whole number years to tell his/her age, I think you'd have to say zero. If you could use a decimal number but were still forced to use years as the unit of measure, then, assuming a year to be 365.25 days, a 1 day old baby would be approximately 0.0027378507871321013004791238877481 years old. NOPE They're not ZERO years old in any respect there IS NO zero years. You cant just make it up, the idjits who try to just make themselves look silly. There IS NO zero years Aw man, I though we were on the same side. Look, I don't know what else to tell you other than zero is a perfectly valid number and can be used to measure quantity, length, duration, or anything else.-- Turn off the internet! Join Citizens United Negating Technology For Life And People's Safety! http://www.citizensunitednegatingtechnology.org/ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
theonlyski 3 #132 January 7, 2010 QuoteQuote There IS NO zero years I stand corrected, there is a Year Zero, It's HERE, and only here Take a stopwatch, note the HH:MM:SS look like 00:00:00 Hit start, give it a few seconds, then stop... it will look like 00:00:45. SO while there have been no minutes, there is more than 0 minutes. It is counting the first minute, which is 0, so there are 0 minutes, but still more than absolutely no time elapsed. I dont see whats so difficult about understanding this..."I may be a dirty pirate hooker...but I'm not about to go stand on the corner." iluvtofly DPH -7, TDS 578, Muff 5153, SCR 14890 I'm an asshole, and I approve this message Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Squeak 17 #133 January 7, 2010 Quote There IS NO zero years Aw man, I though we were on the same side. Look, I don't know what else to tell you other than zero is a perfectly valid number and can be used to measure quantity, length, duration, or anything else. We are, but i refuse to allow Zero as a year, that's one of those small steps toward dumbing down. and i wont do that. As I posted previously Zero is a valid reference, it separates positive and negative integers. and i'm all for that. But there is NO ZERO YEAR, Those who insist there is are wrongYou are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky) My Life ROCKS! How's yours doing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Squeak 17 #134 January 7, 2010 QuoteQuote Take a stopwatch, note the HH:MM:SS look like 00:00:00 Hit start, give it a few seconds, then stop... it will look like 00:00:45. SO while there have been no minutes, there is more than 0 minutes. It is counting the first minute, which is 0, so there are 0 minutes, but still more than absolutely no time elapsed. I dont see whats so difficult about understanding this... ZERO is an absolute, 0.45 is not it is 45 100ths of a minute, it is NOT ZERO mintuesYou are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky) My Life ROCKS! How's yours doing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites skittles_of_SDC 0 #135 January 7, 2010 Give up on ski. He'll never understand. He's infantry material that somehow ended up in a better MOS. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites theonlyski 3 #136 January 7, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuote Take a stopwatch, note the HH:MM:SS look like 00:00:00 Hit start, give it a few seconds, then stop... it will look like 00:00:45. SO while there have been no minutes, there is more than 0 minutes. It is counting the first minute, which is 0, so there are 0 minutes, but still more than absolutely no time elapsed. I dont see whats so difficult about understanding this... ZERO is an absolute, 0.45 is not it is 45 100ths of a minute, it is NOT ZERO mintues It is zero minutes elapsed, so it doesnt count as a whole minute... But, if you want to go down that road, then the first year was only say, 11/12ths (for november) of a year, so its not 1 year yet."I may be a dirty pirate hooker...but I'm not about to go stand on the corner." iluvtofly DPH -7, TDS 578, Muff 5153, SCR 14890 I'm an asshole, and I approve this message Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites HeadCone 0 #137 January 7, 2010 Quote Quote There IS NO zero years Aw man, I though we were on the same side. Look, I don't know what else to tell you other than zero is a perfectly valid number and can be used to measure quantity, length, duration, or anything else. We are, but i refuse to allow Zero as a year, that's one of those small steps toward dumbing down. and i wont do that. As I posted previously Zero is a valid reference, it separates positive and negative integers. and i'm all for that. But there is NO ZERO YEAR, Those who insist there is are wrong In the Anno Domini system, no there is no year 0. In the Astronomical system, yes there is: 2 AD = +2 1 AD = +1 1 BC = 0 2 BC = -1 3 BC = -2 Even NASA uses it: http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEhelp/dates.html-- Turn off the internet! Join Citizens United Negating Technology For Life And People's Safety! http://www.citizensunitednegatingtechnology.org/ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites skittles_of_SDC 0 #138 January 7, 2010 For the sake of this argument the number 0 doesn't exist. In the context of this argument erase the number 0 from your memory. I mean everyone who is arguing the new decade started already not just ski. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites skittles_of_SDC 0 #139 January 7, 2010 Ok, so, I'll accept the answer from anyone. If we had no concept of the number interger 0 what number would be the very basis for our counting system? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites theonlyski 3 #140 January 7, 2010 Quote Give up on ski. He'll never understand. He's infantry material that somehow ended up in a better MOS. Prolly had something to do with the 123 I got for COMMO on my ASVAB. Oddly enough, I did score higher on Electrical, Food, Maint, Mechanical, Field Artillery, and Combat... Come to think of it, my lowest scores were GT and Admin... guess I dont make a good pencil pusher. I do have the MOS that requires the highest scores in the Signal Corps..."I may be a dirty pirate hooker...but I'm not about to go stand on the corner." iluvtofly DPH -7, TDS 578, Muff 5153, SCR 14890 I'm an asshole, and I approve this message Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites theonlyski 3 #141 January 7, 2010 QuoteFor the sake of this argument the number 0 doesn't exist. In the context of this argument erase the number 0 from your memory. I mean everyone who is arguing the new decade started already not just ski. Just cause you dont want it to be there, doest mean it isnt... Obviously zero was derrived for a reason."I may be a dirty pirate hooker...but I'm not about to go stand on the corner." iluvtofly DPH -7, TDS 578, Muff 5153, SCR 14890 I'm an asshole, and I approve this message Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites skittles_of_SDC 0 #142 January 7, 2010 QuoteQuoteFor the sake of this argument the number 0 doesn't exist. In the context of this argument erase the number 0 from your memory. I mean everyone who is arguing the new decade started already not just ski. Just cause you dont want it to be there, doest mean it isnt... Obviously zero was derrived for a reason. Quite the opposite, sir. Just because you all DO want it to be there doesn't mean it is. There have been several links provided stating there is no year 0. I have yet to see any of the folks arguing for this being the start of a new decade provide a link from a legitimate source stating there was indeed a year 0. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Squeak 17 #143 January 7, 2010 Quote Just cause you dont want it to be there, doest mean it isnt... Obviously zero was derrived for a reason. Yes so that you had a transition point between positive and negative numbers, not so some clown can think it belongs on a calendar You are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky) My Life ROCKS! How's yours doing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites skittles_of_SDC 0 #144 January 7, 2010 For those of you having an issue with this I made you a visual representation which will hopefully help you understand. Since there is no year 0 (as indicated from every source that has been cited in this thread) it goes directly from 1 bc to 1 ad. That is 1 year. The problem is you folks are thinking of 1 bc as -1 and 1 ad as +1 in which case it would need to be separated by 0. Unfortunately this is incorrect thinking since 1 bc is not actually -1 per se. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites skittles_of_SDC 0 #145 January 7, 2010 Quote Quote Just cause you dont want it to be there, doest mean it isnt... Obviously zero was derrived for a reason. Yes so that you had a transition point between positive and negative numbers, not so some clown can think it belongs on a calendar You are very right sir. People seem to be thinking of 1 BC as -1 and 1 AD as +1 and therefore in their minds there needs to be a 0 separating the 2. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites HeadCone 0 #146 January 7, 2010 Quote Quote Quote Just cause you dont want it to be there, doest mean it isnt... Obviously zero was derrived for a reason. Yes so that you had a transition point between positive and negative numbers, not so some clown can think it belongs on a calendar You are very right sir. People seem to be thinking of 1 BC as -1 and 1 AD as +1 and therefore in their minds there needs to be a 0 separating the 2. Ahem: Quote In the Anno Domini system, no there is no year 0. In the Astronomical system, yes there is: 2 AD = +2 1 AD = +1 1 BC = 0 2 BC = -1 3 BC = -2 Even NASA uses it: http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEhelp/dates.html -- Turn off the internet! Join Citizens United Negating Technology For Life And People's Safety! http://www.citizensunitednegatingtechnology.org/ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Squeak 17 #147 January 7, 2010 Quote Quote Quote Quote Just cause you dont want it to be there, doest mean it isnt... Obviously zero was derrived for a reason. Yes so that you had a transition point between positive and negative numbers, not so some clown can think it belongs on a calendar You are very right sir. People seem to be thinking of 1 BC as -1 and 1 AD as +1 and therefore in their minds there needs to be a 0 separating the 2. Ahem: Quote In the Anno Domini system, no there is no year 0. In the Astronomical system, yes there is: 2 AD = +2 1 AD = +1 1 BC = 0 2 BC = -1 3 BC = -2 Even NASA uses it: http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEhelp/dates.html DONT MISS QUOTE THINGs you oalso left out this little gem Quote Astronomical date numbering was developed for astronomical calculations IT's NOT a Calendar system, it's a system for mathematics, for calulating astrominical data. Not an alternative calendar NOW GET BACK IN YA BOXYou are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky) My Life ROCKS! How's yours doing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Squeak 17 #148 January 7, 2010 Look what I found QuoteThe reason why the 3rd Millennium / 21st Century starts in 2001 is because there was no year 0 (or AD 0, 0 BC).You are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky) My Life ROCKS! How's yours doing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites MikeJD 0 #149 January 7, 2010 Skittles, congratulations for getting 6 pages of posts (already!) out of a completely pointless debate. All of the actually useful measures of time are already agreed upon. It doesn't matter a jot when the 'new' decade begins. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Bolas 5 #150 January 7, 2010 Quote Quote Quote Quote Just cause you dont want it to be there, doest mean it isnt... Obviously zero was derrived for a reason. Yes so that you had a transition point between positive and negative numbers, not so some clown can think it belongs on a calendar You are very right sir. People seem to be thinking of 1 BC as -1 and 1 AD as +1 and therefore in their minds there needs to be a 0 separating the 2. Ahem: Quote In the Anno Domini system, no there is no year 0. In the Astronomical system, yes there is: 2 AD = +2 1 AD = +1 1 BC = 0 2 BC = -1 3 BC = -2 Even NASA uses it: http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEhelp/dates.html Religion did something illogical? Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next Page 6 of 7 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
skittles_of_SDC 0 #135 January 7, 2010 Give up on ski. He'll never understand. He's infantry material that somehow ended up in a better MOS. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
theonlyski 3 #136 January 7, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuote Take a stopwatch, note the HH:MM:SS look like 00:00:00 Hit start, give it a few seconds, then stop... it will look like 00:00:45. SO while there have been no minutes, there is more than 0 minutes. It is counting the first minute, which is 0, so there are 0 minutes, but still more than absolutely no time elapsed. I dont see whats so difficult about understanding this... ZERO is an absolute, 0.45 is not it is 45 100ths of a minute, it is NOT ZERO mintues It is zero minutes elapsed, so it doesnt count as a whole minute... But, if you want to go down that road, then the first year was only say, 11/12ths (for november) of a year, so its not 1 year yet."I may be a dirty pirate hooker...but I'm not about to go stand on the corner." iluvtofly DPH -7, TDS 578, Muff 5153, SCR 14890 I'm an asshole, and I approve this message Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites HeadCone 0 #137 January 7, 2010 Quote Quote There IS NO zero years Aw man, I though we were on the same side. Look, I don't know what else to tell you other than zero is a perfectly valid number and can be used to measure quantity, length, duration, or anything else. We are, but i refuse to allow Zero as a year, that's one of those small steps toward dumbing down. and i wont do that. As I posted previously Zero is a valid reference, it separates positive and negative integers. and i'm all for that. But there is NO ZERO YEAR, Those who insist there is are wrong In the Anno Domini system, no there is no year 0. In the Astronomical system, yes there is: 2 AD = +2 1 AD = +1 1 BC = 0 2 BC = -1 3 BC = -2 Even NASA uses it: http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEhelp/dates.html-- Turn off the internet! Join Citizens United Negating Technology For Life And People's Safety! http://www.citizensunitednegatingtechnology.org/ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites skittles_of_SDC 0 #138 January 7, 2010 For the sake of this argument the number 0 doesn't exist. In the context of this argument erase the number 0 from your memory. I mean everyone who is arguing the new decade started already not just ski. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites skittles_of_SDC 0 #139 January 7, 2010 Ok, so, I'll accept the answer from anyone. If we had no concept of the number interger 0 what number would be the very basis for our counting system? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites theonlyski 3 #140 January 7, 2010 Quote Give up on ski. He'll never understand. He's infantry material that somehow ended up in a better MOS. Prolly had something to do with the 123 I got for COMMO on my ASVAB. Oddly enough, I did score higher on Electrical, Food, Maint, Mechanical, Field Artillery, and Combat... Come to think of it, my lowest scores were GT and Admin... guess I dont make a good pencil pusher. I do have the MOS that requires the highest scores in the Signal Corps..."I may be a dirty pirate hooker...but I'm not about to go stand on the corner." iluvtofly DPH -7, TDS 578, Muff 5153, SCR 14890 I'm an asshole, and I approve this message Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites theonlyski 3 #141 January 7, 2010 QuoteFor the sake of this argument the number 0 doesn't exist. In the context of this argument erase the number 0 from your memory. I mean everyone who is arguing the new decade started already not just ski. Just cause you dont want it to be there, doest mean it isnt... Obviously zero was derrived for a reason."I may be a dirty pirate hooker...but I'm not about to go stand on the corner." iluvtofly DPH -7, TDS 578, Muff 5153, SCR 14890 I'm an asshole, and I approve this message Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites skittles_of_SDC 0 #142 January 7, 2010 QuoteQuoteFor the sake of this argument the number 0 doesn't exist. In the context of this argument erase the number 0 from your memory. I mean everyone who is arguing the new decade started already not just ski. Just cause you dont want it to be there, doest mean it isnt... Obviously zero was derrived for a reason. Quite the opposite, sir. Just because you all DO want it to be there doesn't mean it is. There have been several links provided stating there is no year 0. I have yet to see any of the folks arguing for this being the start of a new decade provide a link from a legitimate source stating there was indeed a year 0. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Squeak 17 #143 January 7, 2010 Quote Just cause you dont want it to be there, doest mean it isnt... Obviously zero was derrived for a reason. Yes so that you had a transition point between positive and negative numbers, not so some clown can think it belongs on a calendar You are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky) My Life ROCKS! How's yours doing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites skittles_of_SDC 0 #144 January 7, 2010 For those of you having an issue with this I made you a visual representation which will hopefully help you understand. Since there is no year 0 (as indicated from every source that has been cited in this thread) it goes directly from 1 bc to 1 ad. That is 1 year. The problem is you folks are thinking of 1 bc as -1 and 1 ad as +1 in which case it would need to be separated by 0. Unfortunately this is incorrect thinking since 1 bc is not actually -1 per se. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites skittles_of_SDC 0 #145 January 7, 2010 Quote Quote Just cause you dont want it to be there, doest mean it isnt... Obviously zero was derrived for a reason. Yes so that you had a transition point between positive and negative numbers, not so some clown can think it belongs on a calendar You are very right sir. People seem to be thinking of 1 BC as -1 and 1 AD as +1 and therefore in their minds there needs to be a 0 separating the 2. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites HeadCone 0 #146 January 7, 2010 Quote Quote Quote Just cause you dont want it to be there, doest mean it isnt... Obviously zero was derrived for a reason. Yes so that you had a transition point between positive and negative numbers, not so some clown can think it belongs on a calendar You are very right sir. People seem to be thinking of 1 BC as -1 and 1 AD as +1 and therefore in their minds there needs to be a 0 separating the 2. Ahem: Quote In the Anno Domini system, no there is no year 0. In the Astronomical system, yes there is: 2 AD = +2 1 AD = +1 1 BC = 0 2 BC = -1 3 BC = -2 Even NASA uses it: http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEhelp/dates.html -- Turn off the internet! Join Citizens United Negating Technology For Life And People's Safety! http://www.citizensunitednegatingtechnology.org/ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Squeak 17 #147 January 7, 2010 Quote Quote Quote Quote Just cause you dont want it to be there, doest mean it isnt... Obviously zero was derrived for a reason. Yes so that you had a transition point between positive and negative numbers, not so some clown can think it belongs on a calendar You are very right sir. People seem to be thinking of 1 BC as -1 and 1 AD as +1 and therefore in their minds there needs to be a 0 separating the 2. Ahem: Quote In the Anno Domini system, no there is no year 0. In the Astronomical system, yes there is: 2 AD = +2 1 AD = +1 1 BC = 0 2 BC = -1 3 BC = -2 Even NASA uses it: http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEhelp/dates.html DONT MISS QUOTE THINGs you oalso left out this little gem Quote Astronomical date numbering was developed for astronomical calculations IT's NOT a Calendar system, it's a system for mathematics, for calulating astrominical data. Not an alternative calendar NOW GET BACK IN YA BOXYou are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky) My Life ROCKS! How's yours doing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Squeak 17 #148 January 7, 2010 Look what I found QuoteThe reason why the 3rd Millennium / 21st Century starts in 2001 is because there was no year 0 (or AD 0, 0 BC).You are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky) My Life ROCKS! How's yours doing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites MikeJD 0 #149 January 7, 2010 Skittles, congratulations for getting 6 pages of posts (already!) out of a completely pointless debate. All of the actually useful measures of time are already agreed upon. It doesn't matter a jot when the 'new' decade begins. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Bolas 5 #150 January 7, 2010 Quote Quote Quote Quote Just cause you dont want it to be there, doest mean it isnt... Obviously zero was derrived for a reason. Yes so that you had a transition point between positive and negative numbers, not so some clown can think it belongs on a calendar You are very right sir. People seem to be thinking of 1 BC as -1 and 1 AD as +1 and therefore in their minds there needs to be a 0 separating the 2. Ahem: Quote In the Anno Domini system, no there is no year 0. In the Astronomical system, yes there is: 2 AD = +2 1 AD = +1 1 BC = 0 2 BC = -1 3 BC = -2 Even NASA uses it: http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEhelp/dates.html Religion did something illogical? Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next Page 6 of 7 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
HeadCone 0 #137 January 7, 2010 Quote Quote There IS NO zero years Aw man, I though we were on the same side. Look, I don't know what else to tell you other than zero is a perfectly valid number and can be used to measure quantity, length, duration, or anything else. We are, but i refuse to allow Zero as a year, that's one of those small steps toward dumbing down. and i wont do that. As I posted previously Zero is a valid reference, it separates positive and negative integers. and i'm all for that. But there is NO ZERO YEAR, Those who insist there is are wrong In the Anno Domini system, no there is no year 0. In the Astronomical system, yes there is: 2 AD = +2 1 AD = +1 1 BC = 0 2 BC = -1 3 BC = -2 Even NASA uses it: http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEhelp/dates.html-- Turn off the internet! Join Citizens United Negating Technology For Life And People's Safety! http://www.citizensunitednegatingtechnology.org/ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skittles_of_SDC 0 #138 January 7, 2010 For the sake of this argument the number 0 doesn't exist. In the context of this argument erase the number 0 from your memory. I mean everyone who is arguing the new decade started already not just ski. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skittles_of_SDC 0 #139 January 7, 2010 Ok, so, I'll accept the answer from anyone. If we had no concept of the number interger 0 what number would be the very basis for our counting system? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
theonlyski 3 #140 January 7, 2010 Quote Give up on ski. He'll never understand. He's infantry material that somehow ended up in a better MOS. Prolly had something to do with the 123 I got for COMMO on my ASVAB. Oddly enough, I did score higher on Electrical, Food, Maint, Mechanical, Field Artillery, and Combat... Come to think of it, my lowest scores were GT and Admin... guess I dont make a good pencil pusher. I do have the MOS that requires the highest scores in the Signal Corps..."I may be a dirty pirate hooker...but I'm not about to go stand on the corner." iluvtofly DPH -7, TDS 578, Muff 5153, SCR 14890 I'm an asshole, and I approve this message Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
theonlyski 3 #141 January 7, 2010 QuoteFor the sake of this argument the number 0 doesn't exist. In the context of this argument erase the number 0 from your memory. I mean everyone who is arguing the new decade started already not just ski. Just cause you dont want it to be there, doest mean it isnt... Obviously zero was derrived for a reason."I may be a dirty pirate hooker...but I'm not about to go stand on the corner." iluvtofly DPH -7, TDS 578, Muff 5153, SCR 14890 I'm an asshole, and I approve this message Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skittles_of_SDC 0 #142 January 7, 2010 QuoteQuoteFor the sake of this argument the number 0 doesn't exist. In the context of this argument erase the number 0 from your memory. I mean everyone who is arguing the new decade started already not just ski. Just cause you dont want it to be there, doest mean it isnt... Obviously zero was derrived for a reason. Quite the opposite, sir. Just because you all DO want it to be there doesn't mean it is. There have been several links provided stating there is no year 0. I have yet to see any of the folks arguing for this being the start of a new decade provide a link from a legitimate source stating there was indeed a year 0. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Squeak 17 #143 January 7, 2010 Quote Just cause you dont want it to be there, doest mean it isnt... Obviously zero was derrived for a reason. Yes so that you had a transition point between positive and negative numbers, not so some clown can think it belongs on a calendar You are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky) My Life ROCKS! How's yours doing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skittles_of_SDC 0 #144 January 7, 2010 For those of you having an issue with this I made you a visual representation which will hopefully help you understand. Since there is no year 0 (as indicated from every source that has been cited in this thread) it goes directly from 1 bc to 1 ad. That is 1 year. The problem is you folks are thinking of 1 bc as -1 and 1 ad as +1 in which case it would need to be separated by 0. Unfortunately this is incorrect thinking since 1 bc is not actually -1 per se. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skittles_of_SDC 0 #145 January 7, 2010 Quote Quote Just cause you dont want it to be there, doest mean it isnt... Obviously zero was derrived for a reason. Yes so that you had a transition point between positive and negative numbers, not so some clown can think it belongs on a calendar You are very right sir. People seem to be thinking of 1 BC as -1 and 1 AD as +1 and therefore in their minds there needs to be a 0 separating the 2. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
HeadCone 0 #146 January 7, 2010 Quote Quote Quote Just cause you dont want it to be there, doest mean it isnt... Obviously zero was derrived for a reason. Yes so that you had a transition point between positive and negative numbers, not so some clown can think it belongs on a calendar You are very right sir. People seem to be thinking of 1 BC as -1 and 1 AD as +1 and therefore in their minds there needs to be a 0 separating the 2. Ahem: Quote In the Anno Domini system, no there is no year 0. In the Astronomical system, yes there is: 2 AD = +2 1 AD = +1 1 BC = 0 2 BC = -1 3 BC = -2 Even NASA uses it: http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEhelp/dates.html -- Turn off the internet! Join Citizens United Negating Technology For Life And People's Safety! http://www.citizensunitednegatingtechnology.org/ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Squeak 17 #147 January 7, 2010 Quote Quote Quote Quote Just cause you dont want it to be there, doest mean it isnt... Obviously zero was derrived for a reason. Yes so that you had a transition point between positive and negative numbers, not so some clown can think it belongs on a calendar You are very right sir. People seem to be thinking of 1 BC as -1 and 1 AD as +1 and therefore in their minds there needs to be a 0 separating the 2. Ahem: Quote In the Anno Domini system, no there is no year 0. In the Astronomical system, yes there is: 2 AD = +2 1 AD = +1 1 BC = 0 2 BC = -1 3 BC = -2 Even NASA uses it: http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEhelp/dates.html DONT MISS QUOTE THINGs you oalso left out this little gem Quote Astronomical date numbering was developed for astronomical calculations IT's NOT a Calendar system, it's a system for mathematics, for calulating astrominical data. Not an alternative calendar NOW GET BACK IN YA BOXYou are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky) My Life ROCKS! How's yours doing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Squeak 17 #148 January 7, 2010 Look what I found QuoteThe reason why the 3rd Millennium / 21st Century starts in 2001 is because there was no year 0 (or AD 0, 0 BC).You are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky) My Life ROCKS! How's yours doing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MikeJD 0 #149 January 7, 2010 Skittles, congratulations for getting 6 pages of posts (already!) out of a completely pointless debate. All of the actually useful measures of time are already agreed upon. It doesn't matter a jot when the 'new' decade begins. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bolas 5 #150 January 7, 2010 Quote Quote Quote Quote Just cause you dont want it to be there, doest mean it isnt... Obviously zero was derrived for a reason. Yes so that you had a transition point between positive and negative numbers, not so some clown can think it belongs on a calendar You are very right sir. People seem to be thinking of 1 BC as -1 and 1 AD as +1 and therefore in their minds there needs to be a 0 separating the 2. Ahem: Quote In the Anno Domini system, no there is no year 0. In the Astronomical system, yes there is: 2 AD = +2 1 AD = +1 1 BC = 0 2 BC = -1 3 BC = -2 Even NASA uses it: http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEhelp/dates.html Religion did something illogical? Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
