Off and Walking (Jan 04 2010)


log in

Advanced search

Message boards : Technical News : Off and Walking (Jan 04 2010)

Previous · 1 · 2
Author Message
John McLeod VII
Volunteer developer
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 15 Jul 99
Posts: 24806
Credit: 530,998
RAC: 330
United States
Message 961415 - Posted: 7 Jan 2010, 3:11:35 UTC - in response to Message 961399.

Actually 2001 was a milestone year:

A new sesquicentennial (150)

Not counting from year 1, it wasn’t: the current ‘sesquicentury’ began in 1951 and will end with 2100.

The first time that they all line up including the sesquicentennial is 6001. It would have been 3001 except for that pesky quadricentenial.
____________


BOINC WIKI

Norwich Gadfly
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 29 Dec 08
Posts: 100
Credit: 488,414
RAC: 0
United Kingdom
Message 961504 - Posted: 7 Jan 2010, 10:06:36 UTC - in response to Message 961293.

Of course, it is common sense (??) to all those people that click the stopwatch to time a 100 metre race at the commencement of the hundredth metre!!!!
They all get much better times than those who finish at the end of the hundredth metre!!!!

But, of course, the whole argument can be solved if all the runners "Get set and Go" a metre behind the starting line.

What incredible logic the whole world was led to believe at the so-called end of the millennium!!!!

Keith


We are inconsistent in the way we refer to time. We refer to dates by the year, month and day that we are in (starting at 1), but within the day, by hours and minutes completed (1 o'clock occurs an hour into the day).


____________

1mp0£173
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 3 Apr 99
Posts: 8423
Credit: 356,897
RAC: 0
United States
Message 961683 - Posted: 7 Jan 2010, 22:33:29 UTC - in response to Message 961504.

Of course, it is common sense (??) to all those people that click the stopwatch to time a 100 metre race at the commencement of the hundredth metre!!!!
They all get much better times than those who finish at the end of the hundredth metre!!!!

But, of course, the whole argument can be solved if all the runners "Get set and Go" a metre behind the starting line.

What incredible logic the whole world was led to believe at the so-called end of the millennium!!!!

Keith


We are inconsistent in the way we refer to time. We refer to dates by the year, month and day that we are in (starting at 1), but within the day, by hours and minutes completed (1 o'clock occurs an hour into the day).


Remember that the invention of dates and times probably predates the invention of the number zero.

____________

Profile hiamps
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 23 May 99
Posts: 4292
Credit: 72,971,319
RAC: 0
United States
Message 962173 - Posted: 9 Jan 2010, 3:29:28 UTC - in response to Message 961415.

Actually 2001 was a milestone year:

A new sesquicentennial (150)

Not counting from year 1, it wasn’t: the current ‘sesquicentury’ began in 1951 and will end with 2100.

The first time that they all line up including the sesquicentennial is 6001. It would have been 3001 except for that pesky quadricentenial.

Glad I won't be around to see the "end of the world" crowd for that one.
____________
Official Abuser of Boinc Buttons...
And no good credit hound!

OzzFan
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 02
Posts: 13706
Credit: 31,744,982
RAC: 13,286
United States
Message 962181 - Posted: 9 Jan 2010, 3:57:04 UTC - in response to Message 962173.

Actually 2001 was a milestone year:

A new sesquicentennial (150)

Not counting from year 1, it wasn’t: the current ‘sesquicentury’ began in 1951 and will end with 2100.

The first time that they all line up including the sesquicentennial is 6001. It would have been 3001 except for that pesky quadricentenial.

Glad I won't be around to see the "end of the world" crowd for that one.


You mean you're not gonna be around for 2012? ;)

Profile Gary CharpentierProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 13197
Credit: 7,968,052
RAC: 15,869
United States
Message 962194 - Posted: 9 Jan 2010, 5:46:01 UTC - in response to Message 962181.

You mean you're not gonna be around for 2012? ;)

Nope, gonna have my space ship fixed by then and be on the way.

____________

Previous · 1 · 2

Message boards : Technical News : Off and Walking (Jan 04 2010)

Copyright © 2014 University of California