[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 7 KB, 511x113, 21stcenturyfox.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11096290 No.11096290 [Reply] [Original]

umm.. last i checked the year 2000 was in the 20th century.

>> No.11096319

>>11096290
Haha xD

>> No.11096396

Never understood this

>> No.11096404

In case anyone actually doesn't get it, there was no year 0, and a century is 100 years. Extrapolate from there

>> No.11096438

>>11096404
/thread

The 21st century technically began in 2001 and the next decade will officially begin in 2021, but most people don't care honestly. New Years 2020 will still be considered the start of the 2020s for normies. It's just a technicality.

>> No.11096474

>>11096438
But technically, 0 should really count as 1, because its still an integer

>> No.11096480

>>11096474
no

>> No.11096486

>>11096438
>New Years 2020 will still be considered the start of the 2020s for normies.
>2020 isn't part of the 2020s
I get what you mean but it's too awkward to do it the "real" way

>> No.11096516

Perhaps it has something to do with the date being a measure of time. We go from 11.59pm to 12.00am, it becomes morning at midnight.

>> No.11096521

Also for example you may be 23 years old but you are in the midst of your 24th year...

>> No.11096569

>>11096486
Nineteen hundreds are different from nineteenth century though.
Same for decades

>> No.11096605

>>11096569
So 1991-2000 should be called the 2000s?

>> No.11096617

>>11096404
No year 0 in history?
so in history books they go from 1 BCE to 1 CE?

>> No.11096630

>>11096396
first century:
year 1 to 100

second century:
year 101 to 200

...
twentieth century:
year 1901 to 2000

>> No.11096666

>>11096630
>first century:
>year 1 to 100
But it's not a full century until 101

>> No.11096674

>>11096666
Quads don't lie.

>> No.11096732

>>11096617
yes, 1 BC marks the 1 year before christ's birth. as of christ's birth, we enter the first year of the lord.

>> No.11096738

>>11096569
It took me forever to learn this and I still occasionally have trouble remembering. Unintuitive and stupid.

>> No.11096761
File: 41 KB, 323x500, 1525293120146.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11096761

>>11096290
>the current year is 5778

>> No.11096773

>>11096666
But every moment after the moment 101 starts would be in the second century.
So unless something happens before 12:00:01 AM in the year 101, It should count as a second century event.

>> No.11096781

>>11096290
it's not. How fucking stupid would you have to be to accept an obviously retarded definition of century that misrepresents the qualitative thrust of the word, just because someone told you it was right. Cuck is a stupid word but that's exactly what you're being when you do shit like that. 1999 was the last year in the 20th century

>> No.11096792

>>11096666
first century had 99 years. Why would you fuck up 20 centuries when you could just fuck up one?

>> No.11096797

>>11096781
then the first century only has 99 years

>> No.11096805

>>11096792
why would you break consistency when you could have a system that assigns equal number of years to each century?
Which is what a "century" is supposed to be - a period of 100 years.

>> No.11096810

>>11096797
so be it in that case, history is psychology not math. The impact of going from 1999 to 2000 or 1899 to 1900 has a distinct impact on people. The difference between a 99 year time span and a 100 year time span is trivial in comparison.

>> No.11096890

>>11096797
>The first century is not a century

>> No.11096898
File: 71 KB, 800x600, afe6af065ff3431d852fd890a3e5e186.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11096898

>>11096290
You're all retarded.
20th century is 1914-1989.

>> No.11096938

>>11096898
/thread

>> No.11096941

>>11096516
We got to 00:00

>> No.11096945

>>11096797
>not counting year zero.
>being this much of a fag

>> No.11096950

>>11096898
what happened in 1989
that's my fav smashing pumpkins song btw

>> No.11096963

>>11096950
best b trollin ngr

>> No.11096966

>>11096605
No. I just fucking said they were different

>> No.11096969

>>11096666
No. It's a full century the moment year 100 ends and 101 begins

>> No.11096977

>>11096732
No Christ was born at the year 0, but we as humans could not perceive such an unfathomable year fully so it exists merely as a 1 dimensional point or time rather than a line between 2 points. It's glory and piety has compressed it into infinity. Yet that doesn't mean we should count it! 0-99 is the first century even if we as humans were unable to perceive year 0 fully. Thus, 1900-1999 is the 20th century and 2000 is within the 21st century. All is right with the world, Deus Vult brother.

>> No.11098104

>>11096963
Not everybody lives in our country, Andrei

>> No.11098193

>>11096732
No it doesn't, because we don't know the exact day Jesus was born. Our new year doesn't start on any of his traditional birthdates in any case. Being traditional he'd have been born in 1 BC, although historians usually date it to 4 BC (the last year of Herod I's reign.)

>> No.11098228 [DELETED] 

Dunno my dudes. I was taught that:
1st century = 0-99
2nd century = 100-199
...
20th century = 1900-1999
Wikipedia says otherwise, but I disagree with it. I mean, you start from 0 and with it included, you have 100 years until you get to 99. Just like when you're born you're living your first year of life until you reach 1 year old, the century should end when the new X00 begins.

>> No.11098235

>>11096290
anything after January 1st is

>> No.11098271

Roman numerals didn't contain 0 because they were retarded, so for 100 years to pass you now have to go from 1.1.1 to 1.1.101

>> No.11098300

>>11096404
That's stupid. It's not like there were no years before 1 AD. You can call 1 BC 0 AD

>> No.11098314

>>11096486
2020 is the start of the 2020s. Just as 2000 is the start of the 2000s. It's different when you say 20th century, for example, because you're saying 1901 to 2000 (the last day of 2000 exactly) instead of all 1900s numbers, which would include 1900 and not include 2000. One refers to set start-end dates and the other refers to any number that shares it.

>> No.11098319

>>11098271
No, 0 wasn't a number at the time (except in India/Islamic world, then later in Europe and the global world).

>> No.11098326

>>11098319
Yeah that's what I said. They were retarded.

>> No.11098339

>>11096666
>But it's not a full century until 101
no. year one doesn't start at the end. You still experience a full year one.
1-100 is still 100.

>> No.11098351

>>11098339
no anon don't burst their feeling of superiority based on thinking they know some trivial little fact that nobody else knows even though its actually wrong

>> No.11098360

>>11098339
[1,101>
January 1st of the 1st year till December 31st of the 100th year.

>> No.11098367

>>11098326
Easy to say in retrospect. They had the notion of zero and used it, just that they didn't consider it an integer. As most of the world did, except a specific lineage that has made it to the modern world due to it enabling powerful mathematics.

>> No.11098373

>>11098351
It's not actually wrong, that's just how it's used. How it always has been. It's not some trivial little fact that nobody else knows, this is simply how dating works. Colloquially, you might see it die off though. That's ok. Language is dependent on a shared understanding. However, for any serious use it will obviously remain.

>> No.11098385

>>11098367
Kinda the same with imaginary numbers tbqh. Mathematicians who later dealt with sqrt-1 even disliked the name imaginary, since they have a very firm place in mathematics.

>> No.11100883

>>11096319
Ironic shitposting is still shitposting

>> No.11101834

>>11096438
2020 would be the start of the 2020's you stupid nigger.

>> No.11102290

>>11098300
no u