Is there a scientific calendar which uses a different reference than Jesus?
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?
Using Jesus as a reference is unfortunate, yeah, but any other world calendars have to pick a nearly equally arbitrary way to contextualize the start and end year.
I personally use "2024 CE" for "common era", with BCE referring to "before common era". This allows us to communicate relatively clearly with other people who use the Gregorian calendar without explicitly endorsing the birth of Jesus as the important event defining the switch-over between CE and BCE... A bit of a cop out, but
Anyway have fun, there are lots of options
Edit: also the one you're referring to in your post is the Holocene Calendar
Many things us humans do are "unfortunate" because we don't know any better. 2000 years from know, humans might say that it was "unfortunate" that humans used fossil fuels, or wore high heels. Instead of regretting the past, be the change you want to be.
The start of the calendar has to be arbitrary, there's no way around that as it's not feasible to measure the time since the beginning of the universe with good enough accuracy.
As others commented, the Julian Day is a time measure that is actually used in astronomy, and Unix time is a time stamp standard (not really a calendar, although it could be if we got used to it) that is mostly a way to store time points, not really to consume them before converting to a more readable form.
But as a scientist who is wholly irreligious, I'm not overly bothered by using the Gregorian calendar, even though it has Christian (and a lot of pre-Christian) elements. Its annoyances (different numbers of days in each month, weeks not aligning with years, leap years etc.) are due to the fact that we decided to measure time in these arbitrary units. At least it's universal in the modern era (often in conjunction with another calendar), and everywhere you go people understand what "August 5, 2024" means (although August might have to be translated to the target language, since the names of the months are not universal).
That's more than you can say about non-time units of measurement (I'm looking at you, imperial and US customary units!!)
Interestingly, that is not the case. Month names can differ in different languages. I discovered the hard way that Ukrainian has completely different names for months when I had to connect to a Linux machine in Kyiv with Ukrainian locale (I can read Cyrillic, but the abbreviated month names meant nothing to me). The name for August is "serpen" by the way, and it is similar in some other Slavic languages. Also Arabic has its own month names based on Akkadian, August is "ab" but an Arabized version of the word August is also commonly used and understood. Finally, in Mandarin and presumably other Chinese languages, Gregorian months are only referred to by their number, so we are in "bayue" (lit. eight(th) month).
The YouTube Channel Kurzgesagt has proposed a calendar based on the 'Human Era' (HE) instead of before/after christ format.
It's based on the first monument of large-scale human cooperation (building a temple in modern-day turkey) and is quite elegant in my opinion. It 'simply' adds 10.000 years to the calendar we're all already used to. :)
I'm always intrigued by this sort of hypothesis, can you recommend a good link to an alternative explanation for the early church?
Like I get that early Christians worked in a lot (LOT) of existing mythology to make Christianity palatable/ relatable to various local groups. But where could the early Christians have come from if not a Jesus like figure?
Well, I'm talking about two different things here, the first being the hypothetical date for Jesus's birth.
A close reading of the events points to 4 BC as being the year, and the time of year being sometime in Spring "when shepherds watch over their flocks by night."
As for if Jesus was real at all... well, there's absolutely no contemporaneous evidence from his lifetime that he was ever real, no written record, no first hand account, nothing.
The first mention of Jesus was by Flavius Josephus around 93-94 AD, some 60 years after the Crucifixion, but even that may be a 3rd century insert by a Christian transcriber known as Eusebius of Caesarea.
The problem with the Josephus text is two fold: 1) We don't have the original, just copies of copies of copies.
2) None of the works quoting Josephus prior to Eusebius make any mention of the Jesus quote which makes it highly suspicious.
The bulk of the New Testament isn't a result of Jesus at all, it's all because of Paul, formerly known as Saul of Tarsus.
Saul had his own thing going on, which wasn't entirely popular, then he claimed to have this amazing conversion experience on the road to Damascus, changed his name to Paul, and started talking about this Jesus fellow.
We know Paul existed, we have his letters, other writings, and peers talking about him. How odd none of that exists for Jesus...
A couple of really good books to read about Saul/Paul and the early days:
I don't think there's any way to count years without rooting it somewhere arbitrary. We cannot calculate the age of the planet, the sun, or the universe to the accuracy of a year (much less a second or nanosecond). We cannot define what "modern man" is to a meaningful level of accuracy, either, or pin down the age of historical artifacts.
Most computers use a system called "epoch time" or "UNIX time", which counts the seconds from January 1, 1970. Converting this into a human-friendly date representation is surprisingly non-trivial, since the human timekeeping systems in common use are messy and not rooted in hard math or in the scientific definition of a second, which was only standardized in 1967.
There is also International Atomic Time, which, like Unix Time, counts seconds from an arbitrary date that aligns with the Gregorian calendar. Atomic Time is rooted at the beginning of 1958.
ISO 8601 also aligns with the Gregorian calendar, but only as far back as 1582. The official standard does not allow expressing dates before that without explicit agreement of definitions by both parties. Go figure.
The core problem here is that a year, as defined by Earth's revolution around the sun, is not consistent across broad time periods. The length of a day changes, as well. Humans all around the world have traditionally tracked time by looking at the sun and the moon, which simply do not give us the precision and consistency we need over long time periods. So it's really difficult to make a system that is simple, logical, and also aligns with everyday usage going back centuries. And I don't think it is possible to find any zero point that is truly meaningful and independent of wishy-washy human culture.
My ideal is dropping the month altogether for 13 week Quarters with the last day being an intercalary outside the week and same for leap days.
If you wanna avoid huge date numbers, break it down further by weeks, so for example my BDay this year would be 3.10.3, third day of the tenth week of the third quarter.
As for year counting, I like Era of History for the current era, dating to the invention of writing, Era of Legend, dating back 100k years to the earliest date that stories we have preserved now would have to date back to, Era of Evolution, which dates back to the development of Life on Earth, Era of Stars which dates back to the birth of the first Stars in the Universe, and finally the Era of Energy, in which the universe was so superheated that large cosmic structures were physically impossible, dating to the Big Bang.
You can also make a quarter align with the seasons, so you can just call it spring, winter, ...
You can also keep 12 months and make them 30 days each, and add an equinox day in between the seasons. Winter solstice has new year tacked to it and in a leap year summer solstice is two days with the leap year. Keeps it all nicely aligned with the sun.
If you really want you can do weeks of 6 days so each month comes down to exactly 5 weeks of 6 days so the calendar is perfectly reusable each year.
Yeah but with the 7 day week you only have 1 or two intercalaries to figure out
6 day weeks leave you with five or six, and having almost a week on average of extra days to make work feels like too much of a nuisance just to be able to keep a unit of measure that doesn't really serve any actual specificity that you can't get with the Q-W-D format date.
That would create a problem for billing and rent. $2000/month becomes $6500/a quarter. And people who only get paid monthly would not be able to stretch that properly. Many people have bad financial skills.
UNIX time uses a Julian calendar date as a reference, but is independent after that.
As for the 13 month calendar, it's about as nice as cloverleaf interchanges: appealing because it's symmetrical, terrible in practice. Having the days of the month always align to the same weekday means leap years would make things even worse because every 4 years the entire calendar shifts. And if you skip the leap day as a holiday then you just make calculating dates from an epoch like UNIX time even more convoluted.
Barycentric Dynamical Time is one example of an astronomical time standard used in orbital dynamics models requiring consistency across billions of years and relativistic reference frames.
13 months would be great for salaried employees too (so long as the pay per month isn't reduced, which, well, of course it will be, but a man can dream)
I don't know of any books I can recommend, but I'd definitely be down for 13 months with one being short. We could do 12 months of 30 days each plus a 13th month of 5 (or on leap years 6) days.
As far as anything that exists today, there is the Unix Timestamp which is defined as the number of seconds since (the entirely arbitrary time of) midnight January 1st 1970 UTC. Of course, "1970" only makes sense in the context of the Gregorian calendar which still has to do with the birth of Jesus. So, it's not exactly what you're looking for. But maybe it's at least more removed from "the birth of Jesus" than the Gregorian calendar we all generally use.
I guess if you're interested in this stuff, you might be interested in learning about ISO-8601, a standard way of representing dates/times in text. And also the concept of "leap seconds" and things like Leap Smearing.
There's also a great short story about someone trying to explain to an alien with no familarity with earth how our calendar works, but I'm having trouble finding it now. I'll edit this post with a link if I can find it.
Why would you have 30 days in those months? I'm a fan of having exactly 4 weeks each month (28 days), across 13 months. Then every month is the same. If the 1st is on a Monday, then the 1st of every month will always be a Monday. You just need to add a leap week in every now and again.
Id rather intersped the days as out of month days. 4 for the equinoxes and solsti but not sure where to put the fifth although I lean toward an extra one after the winter solsctice as the new year.