|
Post by peterh on Jan 5, 2010 9:57:56 GMT
Since we entered a new decade I think it would be a fun thing to do. Just start with "Ten years ago" and take it from there Ten years ago I was 22 and studying to be a teacher. That didn't work out, luckily, but at the time I even worked as a substitue teacher to earn money. I lived in a shared apartment, spent most weekend partying and didn't really plan far ahead. Ah - those uncomplicated days of old
|
|
|
Post by kitty on Jan 5, 2010 10:18:09 GMT
Ten years ago I was 14, hated my math teacher, was thrown out of class for telling my music teacher she is too old to teach and was having my "Jugendweihe" (the same as confirmation for christians, just without the christian stuff but rather with politicians shakin you hands, telling you "congrats, from now on, we can sue you little butt off") and I did my first internship at the theatre.
Ten years ago I also was a semi-professional dancer, had to train 5 days a week, on a constant sport-diet and tournaments on the weekend.
Ten years ago I fell off the stage during a Christmas concert...
Ten years ago my parents still thought I'd finish school with 16 yrs and work in a tedious job for the rest of my life, so they can be sure I pay their pension - ha!
|
|
|
Post by Galadriel on Jan 5, 2010 10:46:50 GMT
Ten years ago i was 22 years old, married, had a miscarriage, no job (started cleaning in that high school short after my miscarriage) and no life to be honest. My days looked pretty much the same every day. At least a few things have changed for the good.
|
|
|
Post by Glance A'Lot on Jan 5, 2010 10:50:26 GMT
Ten years ago I had the same futile debate about the millenium not being over yet as now with the decade... Why is it that on 31. Dec 2010 nobody will celebrate the end of the first decade of the 21st century, which started 01. Jan 2001 - I mean, it can be calculated with the 10 fingers of your hand, there is no higher math required. What makes me really mad is the media who spread such nonsense to an uncritical mass
|
|
|
Post by Hildor on Jan 5, 2010 14:14:01 GMT
10 years ago I was nine, playing Lego.
|
|
|
Post by Cat on Jan 5, 2010 14:42:04 GMT
Glance; Surely then, with that logic the millenium was actually 2001? Right? (not allowing for a year 0, even though the year 0 existed as we, here, are based on a AD/BC time line, where the year 0BC existed?) Anyway it doesn't matter. You're still gonna die at the same time.
(<3)
Anywho, 10 years ago, I was 7/8, being shouted at for having my music too loud, sleeping too much, being told off for not behaving, refusing to do stuff I didn't want to do, skipping class and being top of my year.
Oh and I was a gymnast.
The year of my first detention (Y), I had to copy out the entries for the letter "E" in the dictionary (good times).
The year of the first boyfrend.
What a simple life.
|
|
|
Post by Dark Phoenix Rising on Jan 5, 2010 15:30:47 GMT
erm, actually, there's no year 0, it goes from 1 BC to 1 AD (using the christian calendar)
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Jan 5, 2010 15:50:52 GMT
Because the number zero was not known in the West when Gregory made his calendar, yes. Not that it truly matters. The entire calendar is purely a matter of agreement, so I always figure what the heck!
|
|
|
Post by Dark Phoenix Rising on Jan 5, 2010 15:54:56 GMT
no, from what I've been able to ascertain it's because it's based on the Julian calendar (which was the old version)
|
|
|
Post by Glance A'Lot on Jan 5, 2010 16:11:03 GMT
Glance; Surely then, with that logic the millenium was actually 2001? Right?The turn of the millenium was on 31. Dec 2000 - the 3rd millenium started 01. Jan 2001, 00:00 hours. The Arabic numeral system, which we use to date, came to the western world in the 12th century. And the beginning of counting time is a starting point, not a time period. When you're born, you start counting, you're a day, a week, a month, etc old - and after 1 year, you have your 1st birthday - whenever you celebrate, you completed another year. So the first year lasted from 01. Jan 0001 to 31.Dec 0001 - hence also, the arithmetical concept of the number zero (though known, as stated above) is irrelevant to the issue! And if anyone disagrees, let me see the 0st (Zero_st) Finger when counting... Edit: On a softer note - when we talk of 'the twenties' for example, we might indeed mean a period of 10 years - but that is not identical to the decade in the century.
|
|
|
Post by Dark Phoenix Rising on Jan 5, 2010 16:38:33 GMT
The confusion comes from the fact that when you are 1 you have completed 1 year of your life and are in your 2nd year of life, however we are in the 2010th year of the gregorian calendar because it counts in the reverse way to the way we count age.
The reasoning behind this comes if you attend church ever (or ever have for a period of time) and the years are often referred to as the xxxxth year of our lord.
Other cultures were more sensible and actually have a year 0 because they count completed years.
@glance - before I do that, maybe you could show me the 1/2 finger first.
|
|
|
Post by Glance A'Lot on Jan 5, 2010 16:49:18 GMT
Other cultures were more sensible and actually have a year 0 because they count completed years. But we DO count completed years! ...however we are in the 2010th year of the gregorian calendar because it counts in the reverse way to the way we count age.What makes you say that? We are in the year 2010 from (since) the birth of Christ (the date of which was defined per agreement - but it still is a POINT in time) - if we were counting backwards - where from? Time is not reversible. Also we cannot be in the 2010th year of the Gregorian Calendar, as this calendar is only about 500 years old. We are in the 2010th year according to the Gregorian calendar - but it is still counted as periods passed from a starting point. There are absolutely no events dated between 01 Jan 0000 and 31 Dec 0000. Even purely arithmetically - in a row of -1 _ 0 _ +1, the numbers are points in the row, the 'years' would be the distance between them, and incidentally, the distance from -1 to 0 is equal to the distance from 0 to +1. The reasoning behind this comes if you attend church ever (or ever have for a period of time) and the years are often referred to as the xxxxth year of our lord.Now this doesn't contradict - we are now IN the 2010th year of the Lord - but it ain't over yet! {And I CAN cut the first half of your first finger...}
|
|
|
Post by Dark Phoenix Rising on Jan 5, 2010 17:04:29 GMT
The gregorian calendar goes from 1 BC to 1 AD with no year 0 as did the julian calendar it replaced. This is why 2011 is the new decade and not 2010.
Astromoney (sp???) does however have a year 0 and so Astronomical BC years are 1 year out from calendar BC years
|
|
|
Post by Glance A'Lot on Jan 5, 2010 17:20:13 GMT
The gregorian calendar goes from 1 BC to 1 AD with no year 0 ... This is why 2011 is the new decade and not 2010.
This is what I'm saying all along!
Wiki says:
Year zero is not used in the widely used Gregorian calendar, nor in its predecessor, the Julian calendar. Under those systems, the year 1 BC is followed by AD 1. However, there is a year zero in astronomical year numbering (where it coincides with the Julian year 1 BC) and in ISO 8601:2004 (where it coincides with the Gregorian year 1 BC) as well as in all Buddhist and Hindu calendars.
So you were partly correct.
|
|
|
Post by Dark Phoenix Rising on Jan 5, 2010 17:24:53 GMT
however it does mean that because there is no year 0 the calendar is not counting completed years.
|
|
|
Post by Glance A'Lot on Jan 5, 2010 17:46:26 GMT
Now you lost me - what else does it count then?
How would the insertion of a YEAR 0 count completed years and the omission not?
Whether I call the first period 0 or 1, the period is over after it passes. The only thing it does, is shift the turning point of a wider span. Whether I count 0 -> 9 or 1 -> 10, there is no difference in principle. I'm still counting the steps (respectively the distances between them)
I to some extent understand the astronomers, as they deal in tremendous time spans, and in their mathematical equations get into trouble with the negative figures - but, to me, that's the difference between arbitrarily defined dates and objective time spans. (the light year is distance of light travelled in a year, with the year being a period independent of dates)
|
|
|
Post by Cat on Jan 5, 2010 18:12:35 GMT
Again, we're still gonna die at the same time ;D
|
|
|
Post by Ubereil on Jan 5, 2010 18:52:00 GMT
Ten years ago I was 12 years old and went in the 6:th grade. I was the best in my class in music, and above average in everything else (I was probably just below the top level, but it didn't felt like more than just above average). I played football, was really bad at it so most pepole there despised me. I had poor self esteem. I was a big pessimist. I was in for what would have been the best three years of my life if only I'd realized how good I had it at the time. I'd discovered cRPG's and was loving them. Which is kind of interesting considering how good my english was at the time. I loved Metallica, Aerosmith and AC/DC. And I based my self esteem sorely on how good my taste in music was! You know, the usual "pepole don't understand the kind of music I listen to but I do" reasoning. I also loved reading at that age. Not like now when I enjoy it, back then I really loved it. Übereil
|
|
|
Post by Hand-E-Food on Jan 5, 2010 21:46:21 GMT
Ten years ago I was 18 and starting my second year of University. I'd been dating my first long-term girlfriend for a few months. I was enjoying drinking away Tuesday nights with Uni friends. I was repeating Structures & Materials. I was living in (and not exactly looking after) Dad's house while he was working in England for six months. My girlfriend brought home the first cat I called mine, Brutus. And, I don't remember much else from that year.
|
|
|
Post by Hand-E-Food on Jan 5, 2010 22:14:01 GMT
however it does mean that because there is no year 0 the calendar is not counting completed years. Now you lost me - what else does it count then? How would the insertion of a YEAR 0 count completed years and the omission not? What DPR is saying is the number of the year AD does not represent the number of years that have been completed since the start of the AD calendar. AD 1 is the first year of the calendar: AD 1 = 1st year.AD 2010 is the 2010th year of the calendar: AD 2010 = 2010th year.The first year was completed as AD 2 starts: AD 2 = 1 complete year.The 2010th year will be completed as AD 2011 starts: AD 2011 = 2010 complete years.The first decade is complete as AD 11 starts: AD 11 = 10 complete years.The first century is complete as AD 101 starts: AD 101 = 100 complete years.The first millennium is complete as AD 1001 starts: AD 1001 = 1000 complete years.The second millennium is complete as AD 2001 starts: AD 2001 = 1000 complete years since the start of 1001.If the calendar started with AD 0, this would be different, but it's not. A decade, century, or millennium can be measured from any one date to any date 10, 100, or 1000 years away: Start of 25-May-1981 to end of 24-May-1991 = 1 decade.When you talk about " the 3rd millennium AD," it refers to the 3rd millennium from that start of the AD calendar, or 2001 to 3000. We are currently in the 201st decade AD which spans 2001 to 2010.
|
|