>
On Mon, 21 Jul 1997, Glenn Cole wrote:
> FWIW, there's an interesting article regarding calendars in the
> current (July 1997) issue of The Atlantic Monthly magazine.
> (Which is the first date of the new millenium, 1 Jan 2000 or 1 Jan 2001?)
>
> Separately, there's also an article that questions the broad push
> of computers in K-12 classrooms at the expense of other programs.
>
> Both articles can be found online at
> <http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/current/contents.htm>
>
> (The calendar article is entitled "Zero.")
>
> --Glenn Cole
> Software al dente, Inc.
> [log in to unmask]
>
Of course, theoretically, the first date of the new millenium is 1 Jan
2001, because the first century began not on Jan 1, 0 but on Jan 1, 1 and
ended not on Dec 31, 99 but on Dec 31, 100.
There was no year 0. There was year -1 = year 1, B. C followed by year 1.
These facts, however, won't stop the people ruled by magic numbers. For
them, number 2000 is more magic than number 2001, and they cannot wait of
there is an ocassion for drinking, petard blowing, end-of-world
expecting...
Technically, the turnover on Jan 1, 2000 is well discussed in this list.
For computer experts, that will mean the magic date.
For the people, expecting the end-of-world: I have read somewhere that the
synod of Nicea, in the 4th century, made a mistake when determined the
year of Jesus's birth. I do not remember the sign of their error, so the
end-of-the-world will happen (if God uses decimal system) within 2000+-10.
Frank
|\ /~ ~~|~~~ Family : NAGY; first name : FERENC; title : Ph. D.
| \ | | Institute of Isotopes of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences
| \ | -+- HUNGARY-1121 BUDAPEST Konkoly-Thege M. ut 29,(1525 Bp. POB 77)
| \| | [log in to unmask] (36-1)-395-9123 Fax: ~395-9002
`-' ' `-' Home: H-1214 BUDAPEST Raketa u. 29. I. 3. (36-1)-277-4229.
There are 3 kinds of programming errors: syntactical, semantical and mystical.
The programmers have to suck up the users just as much as absolutely necessary.
|
