Please explain my confused me like I’m 5 (0r 4 or 6).

  • PowerCrazy
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    7 months ago

    But you are missing the point,. There is no reason to ever start a calendar at year zero. The starting point can be zero, fine, but once the first day goes by, you are in the first day of year 1, not year zero and that is logical and has nothing to do with smart astronomers etc, “not understanding the number zero.”

    At this point I’d say the only person who doesn’t understand zero is you.

    • qtj@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      It makes sense to start with the year zero when you want to do any calculations that involve dates that where before and after year one. If an empire was founded in 50 BC and dissolved in 50 CE to calculate its age when it was dissolved you have to acknowledge that there is no year zero so instead of just calculating 50 - (-50) = 100 you have to substract one which is counter intuitive. Because it went from year 1 BC straight to 1 CE.

      • PowerCrazy
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        The length of time an empire existed isn’t really important in the study of history. You need to describe the contextual existence of the empire within history, and you do that by specifying the start and end dates (in whatever calendar system you want to use). Using your example, if you say that empire existed for 101 years, why is that significant? It’s not. But if I say that empire existed in the middle east during the time of Christ and Roman occupation of Palestine, THAT provides the important historical context for why that empire was significant, and what kind of importance it may have had.