• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    2
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    I mean, zeroth would still be zeroth; it’s just based on the cardinal the moment before it arrived rather than after, assuming you start with nothing and add objects. Unfortunately that’s not conventional, probably in any language, and so you get a situation where a positional notation clashes with how we want to talk about the larger divisions of it casually. This sort of thing is exactly why computer science does use zero indexing.

    Relatedly, there was also no year 0; it goes straight from 1 BC to 1 AD.

    • Jojo
      link
      fedilink
      1
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      But then otherwise we would have a year +0 and a year -0. You really want that on your conscience?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        1
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        Signed zero is hiding under your bed.

        I mean, it would be notated 0AD/BC(E) so it’s not like it would look goofy either. A separate year 0 that’s neither would also be an option, with the reference event within it.

        • Jojo
          link
          fedilink
          28 months ago

          Signed zero is hiding under your bed.

          Ha! Then it’s trapped! I have one of those fancy beds with drawers in it.

          Wait… That means it’s going to pop out of my drawers…

          Anyone want a bed?