Hmmm math. I learned years ago just how subjective even Math is. Having spent many years in the natural sciences I was very used to math 2+2=4. Then I made the mistake of taking an Economics class, and the prof said what is 2 + 2, my hand went up, I know, I know 4! No, it's 7 you forgot to allow for the elasticity of demand and the supply and giz goz...needless to say I hate Econ...almost as much as I hate Hollywood.

Skip

Quoting Dan W:

Quote:
Think of it this way, 1 Jan 0000 to 1 January 0001 is the first year.

Technically, this is wrong.  1 Jan 0000 to 31 Dec 0000 is the first year.  1 Jan 0001 starts the 2nd year.

Quoting Unicus69:

Quote:
Technically, that is wrong.  The first year of the modern calendar started on 1 Jan 0001 and ended on 31 Dec 0001.  There was no year 0000.

Technically, I was using his example as my example.

Quoting Unicus69:

Quote:
Quoting Dan W:

Quote:
Quoting widescreenforever:

Quote:

Quote:
Quoting Dan W:
Your problem is that you are thinking in whole numbers. Everything from 0 to 1 is less than a whole number. This means that even though the 21st century began 1 January 2000 the first year was not complete until 1 January 2001.

Your wrong there;  the start of the first year of the 21st Century is 2001 and not 2000,
the year 2000 was the 10th year of the 1990's..

Again, you are missing anything less than a whole number.

Think of it this way, 1 Jan 0000 to 1 January 0001 is the first year.

You have bought into the myth that there was a year 'zero'.  There wasn't.  There is a lot of material on this.  Here is one excerpt from one:

The concept of a year "zero" is a modern myth (but a very popular one). Roman numerals do not have a figure designating zero, and treating zero as a number on an equal footing with other numbers was not common in the 6th century when our present year reckoning was established by Dionysius Exiguus. Dionysius let the year C.E. 1 start one week after what he believed to be Jesus' birthday.

Therefore, C.E. 1 follows immediately after 1 B.C.E. with no intervening year zero. So a person who was born in 10 B.C.E. and died in C.E. 10, would have died at the age of 19, not 20.

Without having read all the posts after this one, I will add my 2 cents worth.

If there was no year 0, the first year of the 1st century is 01 January 0001 to 31st December 0001, therefore, the LAST year for that same century is 01 January 0100 to 31st December 0100, which makes 01 January 2001 the start of the first year of the 21st Century. Each century has 100 years and not 99 for the first and 100 thereafter.

If there was a year 0, then the first century would have ended on 31st December 0099 and the 2nd starts on 1st January 0100, which would mean then that the 21st century starts on 1st January 2000, but as was stated earlier, the Romans do not have a 0 and started counting from 1, so we are left with the 21st century starting on 1st January 2001.

By the same token, for each of us when we are born we are in our first year and celebrate the first birthday on the anniversary of our birth but it is actually the start of our second year of life, hence when we say we are (insert age here) we are actually that age plus the days/weeks/months since the day of birthday or on the (insert age here) + 1 year of our lives.

Quoting Dr. Killpatient:

Quote:
So, how much is that check worth?

Unless I'm mistaken....... 2 cents.

Quoting Dan W:

Quote:
Quoting Dr. Killpatient:

Quote:
So, how much is that check worth?

Unless I'm mistaken....... 2 cents.

Nope, two tenth of a cent, which should be rounded down to zero. 

Quoting Dr. Killpatient:

Quote:
So, how much is that check worth?

$536.49

You can see the math here.

Quoting Asphyxion:

Quote:
You can't divide through 0 which you do where you divide through (x - x).

The candidate gets 100 points. For a 101 points you would have got a teddy bear.

;)