Calculation of Times

[Thomas Knierim]

Tying in with the "Why do we only count in millennia" thread, I would like to ask another question:

Why do we still use the "Anno Domini" system?

The answer can only be tradition. In a time of secular government, scientific progress and rapid globalisation, it seems hopelessly outdated to count years from the (supposed) birth of Jesus. First of all, not all of the world is Christian and thus internationally we have to put up with a variety of different calendar systems. For example, in the Buddhist era this (2008) is the year 2551. Second, is doesn't seem appropriate to mark the modern calendar era with an religious event out of antiquity. I find it more appropriate if humanity could agree on a global common calendar era marked by an event that has equal importance to all of mankind.

In my opinion, the invention of the printing press would be a good candidate, since it started an unparalleled revolution in human development. With the invention of the printing press, knowledge and education was for the first time available to everyone. Since the printing press was invented in 1439, this would be the year 569 AG (after Gutenberg). However, some Asian nations might object, since they used other traditional printing methods. Perhaps another good starting point may be the mapping of the human genome. It was an international effort which certainly affected all of humanity in the same way, although in what ways exactly has yet to be seen. Since this is a fairly recent event (2003), we would be in the year 5 right now and it shouldn't be too difficult for us to switch writing dates from 28/03/08 to 28/03/05.

Any other suggestions?

Cheers, Thomas

[the_aphid]

Rather than basing the new 'international calendar' around an event, why not simply agree on an arbitrary date in the future on which we will assign it as 'Year Zero', and then tare the clock in a manner of speaking. Perhaps we should calibrate it to the Planetary Alignment (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jupiter_effect) of a particular point in time in the future or in the past. Or, maybe we should switch to metric time like Internet time, or Network time, and assign year zero to their first day of implementation. :unsure:

[scameter]

Well, since everyone is so hip in modern times on mathematical precision and the wonder of science, I think we should use a time system based on the amount of time that has elapsed since the Big Bang, some 13 billion years. Instead of saying, this year it's 2008 AD or 2551 Buddhist Year, we should say, this year it's 13 billion, 700 million, etc., if we want true accuracy.

[schrodinger]

Why do we still use the "Anno Domini" system?

The answer can only be tradition. In a time of secular government, scientific progress and rapid globalisation, it seems hopelessly outdated to count years from the (supposed) birth of Jesus. First of all, not all of the world is Christian and thus internationally we have to put up with a variety of different calendar systems. For example, in the Buddhist era this (2008) is the year 2551. Second, is doesn't seem appropriate to mark the modern calendar era with an religious event out of antiquity. I find it more appropriate if humanity could agree on a global common calendar era marked by an event that has equal importance to all of mankind.—Thomas--




I suspect that this is a “problem” that will self correct in due time. The problem with the example you have given, viz the invention of the printing press, is that it is still referenced back to an anno domini year, namely the year 1439. The present year would be the year 569 simply because it is referenced to 1439 A.D. which does not free us from the earlier reference at all! What is required is some event of such profound importance as to compel humanity to mark that event as the origin of a new era which completely supercedes and overrides any earlier origin. Obviously, that event has not yet happened or we would already be commemorating it! Possible candidates may be: discovery of extraterrestrial life, cataclysmic earthquake or volcanic eruption, cure for aging, advent of artificial intelligence, nuclear holocaust or even the second coming of Jesus, among many other candidates. I think it is a case of "We’ll know it when it happens"


As long as we are expanding this subject, :p there is one thing about our system of time keeping that has always annoyed me, even when I was a youngster in grade school. I am referring of course, to 12 pm and 12 am! If it is twelve hours ante meridiem is it not also twelve hours post meridiem? And if that is true, what is the difference between 12 am and 12 pm? Since midnight is exactly twelve hours before noon (ante meridiem) and also twelve hours after noon (post meridiem) why should we call midnight 12 am? And since noon is the meridiem, why should we refer to it as 12 pm?

[scameter]

Schrodinger, because the hour of 12pm begins at the meridiem but the rest of the hour occurs after it, and 12am is the other way around.

[Flux]

All though I personally have no objection to the use of B.C. and A.D., I think that if an alternative is needed, it should be at the calender that uses the same years, but with the use of B.C.E. and C.E. instead of some other date. There are several reasons for this. First of all, changing the acronyms would remove the explicit reference to Christianity, and thus make the calender less oriented toward a specific religion. But why not just change the actual date then, you might ask?

Practicality. The smaller the change to the calender system, the easier it is to adjust to it. Secondly, by leaving the date where it is, we avoid what could potentially be a large can of worms. I personally think the change wouldn't be worth the length and silliness of the potential conflict that might ensue. What event is important enough to make it the center of a date? If it's an acheivment that took place in a specific country (as most acheivments do) then you are arguably favoring one nation over another. Basically, deciding on a date would be roughly as equivalent to getting the majority of the world to agree what event is most important in human history, and I can't imagine reaching an compramise would be easy.

Same problem arises for a calender based on some future date. Unless we wish for the turning point date to be randomly set by a computer, then we will likely encounter similar useless and lengthy arguments for and against certain dates based on whether that date is on the anniversery of such and such and event. I like scameter's suggestion of setting the date to the beggining of the universe slightly better, altough that too could bring us into a mire of sillieness, as it would give creationists something else to complain about.

I admit that having year 0 at Christ's birth does seem a bit biased, but I don't think it's a big enough of an issue to be worth the sharp increase in futile discourse.

[the_aphid]

Well, since everyone is so hip in modern times on mathematical precision and the wonder of science, I think we should use a time system based on the amount of time that has elapsed since the Big Bang, some 13 billion years. Instead of saying, this year it's 2008 AD or 2551 Buddhist Year, we should say, this year it's 13 billion, 700 million, etc., if we want true accuracy.This wouldn't be accurate at all. The age of the universe is estimated at 13.7 billion years +/- 120 million years. So, I personally don't think such a system should be used ;)Unless we wish for the turning point date to be randomly set by a computer, then we will likely encounter similar useless and lengthy arguments for and against certain dates based on whether that date is on the anniversery of such and such and event.Well why not randomly pick a year. Say 2015. We continue with current conventions until 2015, and then on the day of the winter solstice we designate that the New International New Year, and begin with year zero. Actually, instead of the winter solstice, let's go with the summer solstice, I'm personally tired of celebrating New Years so soon after Christmas! The Summer solstice of 2008 is on June 20th at 23:59 UTC, why not begin the New International Calendar on June 21st one minute later. Thus making June 21st 2008 AD, June 21st 0. Oh, or we could all convert to Stardates! I've always wanted to use decimals within my schedule. :goodlaugh:

[sonrisa]

why stop at the years?

the calendar we use was devised by Julius Caesar, who based it on the founding of Rome back in 753 BC, give or take a few years. So the years have been tweaked already.

the days are named after a bunch of passé gods & goddesses. So are some of the months, except for July, which Caesar named after himself, & the 9th, 10th, 11th, & 12th months, those names mean 7th, 8th, 9th, & 10th (months) respectively.

there has got to be a better way peepulz.....

we could always adopt the Mayan calendar. Not only is it hyperaccurate, but it is about to end in a few years. 2013- the start of the new cycle- would become year 0. This gives us just shy of 5 years to devise a new calendar system

[j000han]

what about the first man that landed on the moon.
It is quite a significant event as from that moment it is not entirely inaccurate to say that we now have extended our territory and hence the moon is included, that is unless if there is a claim of 'ównership' of it ;)by a certain nation.

[Taeguk]

the days are named after a bunch of passé gods & goddesses. So are some of the months, except for July, which Caesar named after himself, & the 9th, 10th, 11th, & 12th months, those names mean 7th, 8th, 9th, & 10th (months) respectively.


Don't forget August was named after Casesar's heir, Gaius Octavius Thurinus better known as "Caesar Augustus".

Regarding the calender, it's convention, and people are used to it so I think it will be difficult to change. I also don't think the change is something that can be imposed from above---many revolutionary movements (such as the French Revolution) tried to introduce new systems of dating, but these systems failed and people reverted to current system.

You can't impose a new system, it will have arise organically of itself. My guess is a change to calander will have to come following a monumentous event, as schrodinger suggests. It will have to have such an impact that a large number people will, by themselves, begin to reckon their lives as "before event x" and "after event x". Until such an event happens, my guess is we're keeping the current system :lol: