Subject: Re: Date 2000 a problem for Apple II?

From: Rubywand <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 09 Nov 1997 23:13:26 -0600

Nathan Mates writes ...
> 
> In article <[email-masked]>,
> Rick Hatton <[email-masked]> wrote:
> >> There is no year 0 in our calendar system. 1 AD is preceded by 1 BC not
> >> zero.  The century years mark the end of a century, not the beginning.
> >> Also note that 2000 is the end of a 400 year cycle,
> 
> >Lets see if I am understanding you. The century year, 2000, is the end
> >of a century, and by implication a millenium (10 centuries). So, the new
> >century, and milleium, would begin the next year, 2001?
> 
>    Correct. Though the larger parties will start 12/31 1999 (or a few
> days earlier-- 12/31/1999 is a friday), the next milennium does not
> begin until 1/1/2001. Just because the general public is uninformed
> and wrong doesn't mean you have to listen to them.
>

     Alas, you do.

     Any contemporary calendar is, essentially, a creature of
conventions accepted by the society which uses it. One disregards these
conventions at ones own risk.

     For example, suppose someone who claims that The Millenium begins
in 2001 A.D. were in charge of marketing for a major auto maker. Were
he/she to put belief into action, the company would miss out on
"Millenium Year" promotions for the year 2000 and lose millions in
potential sales. Then, assuming he/she had not been fired, the company
would launch an expensive "Millenium" promo for the year 2001 which, of
course, would fall flat.

     For all their blowing and carping, those who claim to believe that
The Millenium begins in 2001 will, in fact, behave as though it begins
in 2000. Every important decision they make which hinges upon placement
of the Millenium Year will favor 2000, not 2001. Their actions will,
thus, betray them.

     There is absolutely no question about it: the next Millenium _will_
begin in the year 2000.

     Well, then, _should_ the next Millenium begin in 2001?

     If one assumes that "millenium" equates exactly with "1000 years
named 'A.D.'", then, 2001 would fit as the beginning of the next
millenium. There was no 0 A.D.. On the other hand, there was no "1
A.D.", either, until it was so named many years afterwards. 1 A.D. is a
convention.

     The question boils down to this: What specific year is the
reference for time spans called "century" and "millenium" in the current
era?

     What we discover is that, for many hundreds of years, calendar
authorities and the general populace have celebrated the beginning of
new centuries and new millenia during the 0th year of each century. This
answers our question.

     The reference year for century and millenium spans is 1 B.C., not,
as some might wish, 1 A.D. One may or may not choose to call 1 B.C.
"Year Zero". It does not matter. That it is, in fact, the reference year
for our "century" and "millenium" time spans is, literally, written in
stone. 2000 is, as it _should_ be, the beginning of the next millenium. 

Rubywand