109

I hope questions are allowed here. I am curios if there is a different sort of scientific calendar which does not use the birth of Jesus as a reference like AD and BC. For example Kurzgesagt's calendars use the the current year plus 10000 as this represents the human better or something like that.

Would there be a way to do this more accurately? How could we, in a scientific correct way, define a reference from where we are counting years?

Also I have read about the idea of having 13 months instead of 12 would be "nice" because then we could have a even distributed amount of days per month.

Are there already ideas for this? What would you recommend to read?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Adderbox76@lemmy.ca 24 points 11 months ago

Historians don't use "BC" and "AD". Haven't for a while now.

While the arbitrary date remains the same (year zero), it's C.E. (common era) or B.C.E. (Before common era)

FYI

[-] ohlaph@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

Came here to say this. It's an easy reference for most, so it makes sense why they kept it.

this post was submitted on 05 Aug 2024
109 points (91.0% liked)

science

20576 readers
182 users here now

A community to post scientific articles, news, and civil discussion.

rule #1: be kind

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS