?
Too much sherry
the question is more - what century are you in if you still have stationary?
Just follow the same two thousand year old convention as everyone else does. A uniformly incrementing sequence of numbers isn't random by the way.
I’m wondering how best to write the real year
How do you suppose you measure that accurately enough that we don't end up with a similarly arbitrary number?
rather than the strange religious random number currently used.
It's a baseline, nothing more. I mean, you could use the beginning of written history (but see above), the industrial revolution or the beginning of the atomic age but they would all be similarly strange and arbitrary.
You might as well decimalise time whilst you're at it. Let us know how you get on, I'd suggest writing your new standard in Esperanto.
the strange religious random number currently used.
Its actually referred to as the 'Civil Calendar' in that all sorts of societies, not just Christian ones or even abrahamic ones, use the Gregorian calendar because its administratively convenient to use dates that are universally recognised, there's only four countries that don't use the Civil calendar or a modified version of it as their principle system of dates.
If we ant a more secular calendar, counting from a point that defines our modern era, giving us a suitable point to couunt backwards into the past from, or forwards into the future I suggest we simply call this new year "34"
Its 34 years since Marathons became Snickers
Pol Pot tried to start a new calendar in Cambodia from Year Zero and look how well that went.
I think I'd rather continue with the current method, thanks.
Just use the Japanese Imperial era system modified for English monarchs. This year will be year Charles III 2. Last year started as year Elizabeth II 71, but ended as year Charles III 1.
the question is more – what century are you in if you still have stationary?
Obviously something stood still for them.
Obviously something stood still for them.
👍
But how would you define the Gregorian period 1930-67 before Snickers became Marathons?
but she gets the reference
I got the reference.
Modern history begins in 1817, when Karl Drais invented his ‘running machine’
It could do with being a bit longer, lower, and slacker, but it’s not bad.
That makes this year 207
Well since last year, this year is 01 so just use that if 2024 bothers you.
But how would you define the Gregorian period 1930-67 before Snickers became Marathons?
The first dark age
the second dark age is what we currently call 1998 when Coco Pops were renamed Coco Krispes before being renamed Coco Pops again in 1999
I'd go with MMXXIV, adds a certain gravitas.
If it’s worth doing, it’s worth doing well. How do you feel about Mayan numerals? Mesoamerican Long Count: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesoamerican_Long_Count_calendar
Radiocarbon dates are often related to 'Before Present' (BP) where 'Present' is taken as 1950. So this year would be -74 years BP
Hope this helps but doubt it does
Modern history begins in 1817, when Karl Drais invented his ‘running machine’
Actually that seriously would be year 1 of quite a significant modern common era - year zero would the 'Year without a Summer' which was 1816. The driving force behind what became the bicycle was in part the global famine that resulted from a volcanic eruption that year. Crop failures meant amongst other things there was no oats for horse feed and that drove the development of mechanical means of transport.
At this time of year theres quite a signfifcant echo of that event in the way we decorate our houses at christmas, all around the world, to look like the Christmases Charles Dickens remembers from his childhood in the 1810s. Even though it rarely snows at chairmas in the UK we much of our Christmas imagery is snowy - even Australian Christmas cards have snow on them.
We still have quite a lot of cultural echos from that year
You can even date artwork by the use of certain pigments in becuase sunsets looked different before and after 1816
‘approximately 4.5billion
Eh? If you start from the actual beginning it's more like 13.7 billion. Why is your arbitrary calendar start date any better than the commonly accepted one?
Last year started as year Elizabeth II 71, but ended as year Charles III 1.<br /><br />
In England certainly, but in Scotland presumably it started as Elizabeth R 71? Or perhaps Elizabeth I 71?
There’s certainly room for doubt in that system.
It's time to add a bit of science to my headed paper is all.
I was going with 4.5 billion as the beginning of earth's formation but I'm happy to go with the best sciencey guess for the big bang if it pleases others. Though that is very likely to change so maybe earth's formation would be best for now. I suppose I could still keep 2024 in there but add a lil'something in front.
How could I write that in a compact and catchy way so not to upset the traditionalists too much.
Any numbers people able to come up with something for me?
It’s time to add a bit of science to my headed paper is all.
So go with a full ISO 8601 format.
Posted at 20240101151436
I would like to lose the religious focus if possible and represent the real best guess scientific date where ISO 8601 still uses the Gregorian calendar as it's base iiuc.
In England certainly, but in Scotland presumably it started as Elizabeth R 71? Or perhaps Elizabeth I 71?
There’s certainly room for doubt in that system.
Sure, every kingdom will have its own calendar. You'll just need a set of conversion tables to convert back and forth between the different systems.
I'm not a monarchist either so that wouldn't be suitable at all🤔
Just use the number of seconds since 1st January 1970.
This was posted at Epoch 1704121485.
That'll give you 14 good years, but be careful in 2038 as there might be all sorts of confusion.
The only time is now.
The future will always be the future.
The past will be whenever and whatever we choose to write it as.
The time is now, only now and always now. Worry not about your imaginings of the past or future. You only have the now.
Sure, every kingdom will have its own calendar. You’ll just need a set of conversion tables to convert back and forth between the different systems.
That works.
Though I quite like the idea that the 1000 from Kings Cross might arrive at Waverley 400 years before it set off. A good couple of hundred years before the station was built to receive it.
Tell me you work for LNER without telling me etc etc
It's called 2024 CE meaning Christian Era. You may not like it, but it is the Christian era, since Christianity exists whereas it did not before.
You could use one of the many other known calendar systems but no-one would know what you were on about so that would be awkward.
It’s time to add a bit of science to my headed paper is all.
The time for the creation of the Earth is nowhere near accurate enough - I mean it probably took a billion years to go from cloud of dust to planet, and the creation of the Earth is somewhere in that time period. You'd be better off going by the number of orbits since the earliest supernova was observed in a calendar system that can be correlated to our own which was in 185 CE by the Chinese.
CE doesn't stand for Christian Era.
I don't think a billion years or 2 matters for accuracy, best guess will be fine, removing the religious focus is more important
I could just go with something like A4.5B2024 for now I guess. It would stop any confusion with historical records and allow for simple changes as the accuracy improves.
Anything better or are we happy with that?
Isn't CE current era and BCE is before current era?
I could just go with something like A4.5B2024 for now I guess. It would stop any confusion
No Likey?
Would it be better to add a few thousand years to the 2024 bit to take it back to a baseline of civilisation and lose even more religious focus
Mmm, A4.5B7024. I think we're getting closer.
I could just go with something like A4.5B2024 for now I guess. It would stop any confusion with historical records and allow for simple changes as the accuracy improves.
Anything better or are we happy with that?<br /><br />
No. Because it’s bloody stupid fannying around for the sake of making some sort of statement that nobody wants or gives a toss about. <br />Other than you, obviously. 🙄
And on the rare occasion I actually use my headed note paper, I usually write 01/24.
Just a quick point, Ukraine has recently changed its calendar to what the rest of Europe is using. They clearly place convenience over making some meaningless statement, obviously.
Just a quick point, Ukraine has recently changed its calendar to what the rest of Europe is using.
Not quite - Ukraine has broadly been using the Gregorian Calendar / Civil calendar just like the rest of us, for centuries. It's only certain Christian denominations in Ukraine who have also been using other calendars alongside the Civil one, but most have decided to switch to the Civil / Gregorian in the last year.
Plenty of countries have other calendars they use alongside the Civil one.
isn’t CE current era and BCE is before current era?
CE stands for Conformité Européenne and basically means your date and time doesn't contain any chocking hazards, bendy cucumbers or consume more than 900 watts. BCE is probably something about Brexit and the measurement of time in pints. Maybe year zero should be 2016. But that 'year' is so far 7 years long and counting.
In England certainly, but in Scotland presumably it started as Elizabeth R 71? Or perhaps Elizabeth I 71?
There’s certainly room for doubt in that system.
No, she was Elizabeth II in both Scotland and England. The convention was adopted, i forget when, it might have been for her, IIRC it was Churchill suggested it, that the monach would take the higher number of whichever country had had the nost of that name before. For example, Charles is Charles III because England had had two Charles before and Scotland none, but had he been called James he would have been James VIII, because Scotland has had seven Jameses already, which is more than England's two.
I have no idea where Wales fits into this
You might as well decimalise time whilst you’re at it. Let us know how you get on,
The French tried that in Napoelon's time, it didn't go well. Apart from the fact that we have ten digits to count on a docimal number system makes so much more sense than a decimal one
sirromj
Full Member
Still valid!!
Why have you linked back to this thread, you mad man? Now im stuck in some perpetual STW thread loop hell!
There is this theory...
I'm going to stick with A4.5B7024
Earth's formation 4.5Billion years ago as the base
A for approx
7000 allows room for a chunk of human history
24 so Count can still use his headed paper
Spread it around a bit and see if it sticks💩
But why??
Actually I looked it up, it's Common Era and rather than some modern secular thinking the earliest person to use it was Copernicus, and it was also popular with Jewish scholars.
I don’t think a billion years or 2 matters for accuracy, best guess will be fine, removing the religious focus is more important
Why is it important to remove the religious focus? The society you live in, in Western Europe (assuming you do), is completely intertwined with Christianity and vice versa. It's actually a fascinating subject. A lot of the anti-religious types on here will admit that some of Jesus' teachings are quite reasonable - I don't think this is a coincidence.
In any case your system does not achieve that, you are simply sticking a few characters on the front of the Christian derived date which will never change. If you wanted to go with the age of the earth you could start with the date of the modern radiometric date which was approx 4.55bn determined in 1956, so you could say it's the year 4500000068.
There is this theory…
Time change. You lose, you gain. Makes no difference so long as you keep taking the pills.
For example, Charles is Charles III because England had had two Charles before and Scotland none
Are you certain on that one? Both Charles I & II being Stewarts and all…
Good point, it was after the union of the crwons but before the Act of Union, whoops
CE stands for Conformité Européenne and basically means your date and time doesn’t contain any chocking hazards, bendy cucumbers or consume more than 900 watts. BCE is probably something about Brexit and the measurement of time in pints. Maybe year zero should be 2016. But that ‘year’ is so far 7 years long and counting.
Honestly, I think this may be one of the funniest things I have ever read on the internet.
@maccruiskeen - cheers, I knew it was something like that, I just couldn’t remember the finer details. 👍🏼
24 so Count can still use his headed paper
Son, I’ll carry on using it whatever harebrained scheme you cook up - I hand write any letters I send using good old traditional technology - a fountain pen.🖋️
A lot of the anti-religious types on here will admit that some of Jesus’ teachings are quite reasonable
One might even go so far as to say ‘woke’…
I have an HP deskjet printer..is this going to make it more complicated when calculating my margins with A4 paper?
