2012

[Brunhidden]

And that prediction is:  plans for a mass suicide or two (or twenty) will be partially or fully formed by then, and on the 20th, the event will come close to being carried out.

and thus we celebrate the stupid exterminating themselves

[Alondro]

And that prediction is:  plans for a mass suicide or two (or twenty) will be partially or fully formed by then, and on the 20th, the event will come close to being carried out.

and thus we celebrate the stupid exterminating themselves

Natural selection in progress!   I shall start such a cult myself, and make sure they all give me their money before they off themselves.  Then I'll hide in Costa Rica with the riches.  But I have to make sure I drink the safe Kool-Aid!   

[RobbieThe1st]

The Mayan calender does not end in 2012. It's basically the same as our year 10000 problem.

Perhaps future societies using a different calender will think that we predicted an apocalypse on their equivalent on 1st January, 10000 because most of our time pieces can't count above the year 9999.

Unlikely. systems are gradually switching to timestamp formats. Sure, 32-bit timestamps will expire exactly on Tuesday, January 19th 2038, 3:14:07 GMT time, but as computes quickly switch to 64-bit platforms we might as well expect the timestamps to switch to 64-bit format, which should expire on year 292271023045 (that's billions of years  )

How do you convert a common analog clock to 64-bit time?

Well, the same way you do to get a 32-bit timestamp, but just using 64 bits(with dates that can be expressed in 32 bits, the other 32 will be 0's).

A unix timestamp, like what we are talking about here, is the number of seconds sense January 1st, 1970, GMT. As such, it is hard but not extremely hard to calculate it by hand/create a formula for doing so, and most programming and scripting languages provide a built-in function for doing so.

I have a little list of people I'd be prepared to start sacrificing, if it'd help the oil crisis...

I immediately thought of This.


-RobbieThe1st

[Kasarn]

The Mayan calender does not end in 2012. It's basically the same as our year 10000 problem.

Perhaps future societies using a different calender will think that we predicted an apocalypse on their equivalent on 1st January, 10000 because most of our time pieces can't count above the year 9999.

Unlikely. systems are gradually switching to timestamp formats. Sure, 32-bit timestamps will expire exactly on Tuesday, January 19th 2038, 3:14:07 GMT time, but as computes quickly switch to 64-bit platforms we might as well expect the timestamps to switch to 64-bit format, which should expire on year 292271023045 (that's billions of years  )

How do you convert a common analog clock to 64-bit time?

Well, the same way you do to get a 32-bit timestamp, but just using 64 bits(with dates that can be expressed in 32 bits, the other 32 will be 0's).

A unix timestamp, like what we are talking about here, is the number of seconds sense January 1st, 1970, GMT. As such, it is hard but not extremely hard to calculate it by hand/create a formula for doing so, and most programming and scripting languages provide a built-in function for doing so.

Write ten thousand in numeric form using only four digits.

[Reese Tora]

Write ten thousand in numeric form using only four digits.

assuming we're even using the christian-centric dating method in 7992 years, and that no one in that time frame can be bothered to redign clocks to handle a fifth digit, and that people don't continue to use '08 style shorthand to refer to the year... which would be a powerful clue to any future researchers that a lack of digits for recording doesn't mean a belief that there's no more to record beyond those digits.

ten thousand rendered in four digits:
2710h

(the 'h' does not cound as a digit, it is an indicator of what system of numbering is used, much like prepending a '$' when refering to money.  I would ahve used the more standard 0x, but you might have nitpicked that my indicator contains a digit. I suspect you'll rather compklain that my number is not in decimal notation)

Of course, you could tell me that I can use no more than 4 characters to write it.  I might try to write it as 10k, but I can't find a proper definition of the term 'numeric form' in order to twist it to my will, and all the references I can find seem to indicate that shorthand notation would not count as numerc form.  Since "Numeric form" does not appear to be a properly defined term, there's nothing saying that hexidecimal can't be used.

Back to the actual point, the Mayan calendar is significant only in that the age ends at a point in their calendar where there are more digits that can fit in the highest valued place. (stopping at 13 where they had 20 digits, though an earlier place in their calendar notation only goes to 18 out of 20 before incrementing the next place and reseting to 0)
The actual calendar is capable of recording dates beyond this point without adding any places.  Were the mayan calendar to 'end' by running out of digits (like flipping from 9999 to 0000 on a four decimal character display)  on the 2012 date instead of some book saying the last age ended after that period of time, it wouldn't have been notable; our year 2012 in their notation is the equivalent to our year 2000 in our own notation.

[Kasarn]

Write ten thousand in numeric form using only four digits.

assuming we're even using the christian-centric dating method in 7992 years, and that no one in that time frame can be bothered to redign clocks to handle a fifth digit, and that people don't continue to use '08 style shorthand to refer to the year... which would be a powerful clue to any future researchers that a lack of digits for recording doesn't mean a belief that there's no more to record beyond those digits.

ten thousand rendered in four digits:
2710h

(the 'h' does not cound as a digit, it is an indicator of what system of numbering is used, much like prepending a '$' when refering to money.  I would ahve used the more standard 0x, but you might have nitpicked that my indicator contains a digit. I suspect you'll rather compklain that my number is not in decimal notation)

Of course, you could tell me that I can use no more than 4 characters to write it.  I might try to write it as 10k, but I can't find a proper definition of the term 'numeric form' in order to twist it to my will, and all the references I can find seem to indicate that shorthand notation would not count as numerc form.  Since "Numeric form" does not appear to be a properly defined term, there's nothing saying that hexidecimal can't be used.

Back to the actual point, the Mayan calendar is significant only in that the age ends at a point in their calendar where there are more digits that can fit in the highest valued place. (stopping at 13 where they had 20 digits, though an earlier place in their calendar notation only goes to 18 out of 20 before incrementing the next place and reseting to 0)
The actual calendar is capable of recording dates beyond this point without adding any places.  Were the mayan calendar to 'end' by running out of digits (like flipping from 9999 to 0000 on a four decimal character display)  on the 2012 date instead of some book saying the last age ended after that period of time, it wouldn't have been notable; our year 2012 in their notation is the equivalent to our year 2000 in our own notation.

I lol'd

Quote tree

[Jairus]

I've always thought of it as a "quote pyramid."

And no, I'm not going to continue it.

[Reese Tora]

I always saw it revered to as a quote tower... though tree is much more appropriate, since I was planning on pruning it to size if I replied to it again.

[Jairus]

I always saw it revered to as a quote tower... though tree is much more appropriate, since I was planning on pruning it to size if I replied to it again.

Just replace all of the quotes with *snip* and you'd have your tree pruned right down!

[RobbieThe1st]

Write ten thousand in numeric form using only four digits.

assuming we're even using the christian-centric dating method in 7992 years, and that no one in that time frame can be bothered to redign clocks to handle a fifth digit, and that people don't continue to use '08 style shorthand to refer to the year... which would be a powerful clue to any future researchers that a lack of digits for recording doesn't mean a belief that there's no more to record beyond those digits.

ten thousand rendered in four digits:
2710h

(the 'h' does not cound as a digit, it is an indicator of what system of numbering is used, much like prepending a '$' when refering to money.  I would ahve used the more standard 0x, but you might have nitpicked that my indicator contains a digit. I suspect you'll rather compklain that my number is not in decimal notation)

Of course, you could tell me that I can use no more than 4 characters to write it.  I might try to write it as 10k, but I can't find a proper definition of the term 'numeric form' in order to twist it to my will, and all the references I can find seem to indicate that shorthand notation would not count as numerc form.  Since "Numeric form" does not appear to be a properly defined term, there's nothing saying that hexidecimal can't be used.

Back to the actual point, the Mayan calendar is significant only in that the age ends at a point in their calendar where there are more digits that can fit in the highest valued place. (stopping at 13 where they had 20 digits, though an earlier place in their calendar notation only goes to 18 out of 20 before incrementing the next place and reseting to 0)
The actual calendar is capable of recording dates beyond this point without adding any places.  Were the mayan calendar to 'end' by running out of digits (like flipping from 9999 to 0000 on a four decimal character display)  on the 2012 date instead of some book saying the last age ended after that period of time, it wouldn't have been notable; our year 2012 in their notation is the equivalent to our year 2000 in our own notation.

+1
Honestly, I was going to say exactly that, and you said it better than I could have.

I was doing some calculations, and Hm... Hex is one thing, but with existing letters, you could go to 32 - 5 bits, with 0-W. Granted, it wouldn't be a nibble per character, but it is possible... And, in base 32, 10000 is "9OG" (the O is the letter O).
Edit: I found that there IS is base-32 being used, but it uses different letters(see below). my scheme is shown here as "base-32R" where as the real one is "Base32".
Other calculations wise:

Decimal	Binary	Octal	Hexadecimal	base-32R	Base32
10000	0010011100010000	23420	2710	9OG	IXP
65535	1111111111111111	177777	FFFF	1www	A777
4294967295	11111111111111111111111111111111	37777777777	FFFFFFFF	3WWWWWW	C777777

...Sorry. I recently learned a reasonably easy way of calculating decimal > any base, and any base > decimal conversions, so obviously I have to show off my new-found knowledge.
edit: And, I just learned that there *IS* a base-32, and instead of using 0-W, it uses A-7(ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ234567)... ah well...


-RobbieThe1st

[Kasarn]

So, tell me again how 64-bit time solves the Year 10000 problem?

[RobbieThe1st]

So, tell me again how 64-bit time solves the Year 10000 problem?

Because, you aren't saving your years as a discrete number - you are saving the date and time as a single number, from which the date and time can be calculated. This means that there is no four decimal digits which roll over - it would just add a fifth digit. And a sixth. And so on and so forth. It wouldn't run into any trouble for a ridiculously long time. Now, sure, if you have a display with four date digits, it will roll over to 0000, but internally, it will still know what year it is, and as such will not have any trouble. Remember also, that computers store all numbers as binary, and unless they are using wasteful BCD to store the number, at 9999 it should have no trouble. Of course, it will have trouble when it reaches the maximum storable number, but if it is storing it as a Unix timestamp, 64 bits...  that is going to be in 292 billion years or so, which is a *long* time.


Of course, with smaller computers, like a digital wrist watch for example, they are designed to roll over at a more "normal" number - like every year, or every hundred years. With a system like this, it really doesn't matter, because you generally *know* the year or century.


-RobbieThe1st

[Kasarn]

  It's clear you don't actually understand the problem because you've just agreed with me.


The year 10000 problem:
If the display only has four digits with which to display the year, then you cannot display a five (or more) digit year.

64 bit time:
Stores the number of seconds from the year 1970 as a 64 bits integer.


Now, in order for 64-bit time to be human readable, it first needs to be converted to YYYYMMDD hh:mm:ss, which is where the problem actually occurs. The time being stored as 64 bits does nothing to alter the actual problem.

The solution, as you have just so aptly pointed out is that you add a fifth digit to the year display. However, as you have also pointed out, not all devices can display a fifth digit, which leaves us with the original problem.

Which is where we get back to the Mayan calender: In 2012, it hits it's own version of 9999. It can't count any further without being reset to all zeroes. Therefore, I joked that, in the future, people who are using a different calender might think that we predicted an apocalypse on 10000/01/01 because our four digit displays stop at 9999.

[RobbieThe1st]

It's clear you don't actually understand the problem because you've just agreed with me.


The year 10000 problem:
If the display only has four digits with which to display the year, then you cannot display a five (or more) digit year.

64 bit time:
Stores the number of seconds from the year 1970 as a 64 bits integer.


Now, in order for 64-bit time to be human readable, it first needs to be converted to YYYYMMDD hh:mm:ss, which is where the problem actually occurs. The time being stored as 64 bits does nothing to alter the actual problem.

The solution, as you have just so aptly pointed out is that you add a fifth digit to the year display. However, as you have also pointed out, not all devices can display a fifth digit, which leaves us with the original problem.

Which is where we get back to the Mayan calender: In 2012, it hits it's own version of 9999. It can't count any further without being reset to all zeroes. Therefore, I joked that, in the future, people who are using a different calender might think that we predicted an apocalypse on 10000/01/01 because our four digit displays stop at 9999.

That makes sense. However, that isn't quite what you said earlier.

Also, after reading on Wikipedia about the Mayan Long Count calendar, it appears that it would be more like our year 2000 problem than our year 10000 problem - 2012 is not end of the calendar, just the rollover date of the least four digits - the first is at 12 now, and would simply go up to 13! Now, sure, 'last time' the world 'ended' at this exact time, but that doesn't mean all that much - just that it 'ended' at this time. There is no reason for it to end 'this time' on that date, and even if the calendar was designed to predict some major event, it may come early or late.



-RobbieThe1st

[llearch n'n'daCorna]

I lol'd

Quote tree

I didn't. *snip*

[gh0st]

as aliens try to take over the world, the bermuda trinagle spits out everyone it took, and all the mysterious native American tribes who disappeared come back. all in the same year i might add. it just comforts your heart to know that at the very least all the idiots in the world will finally get what they want as the trully smart people get the girl... of course anyone who even set fourth on 4chan is going to be the first to go down.

[MT Hazard]

I heard somewhere that 'End of days' was meant to be the end of religious belief and the start of a new state of enlightenment, somehow it end up as the end of the world.

Although I guess if your a corrupt preacher raking in the cash from the believers, end of faith would be the end of the world for you.

[Valynth]

I heard somewhere that 'End of days' was meant to be the end of religious belief and the start of a new state of enlightenment, somehow it end up as the end of the world.

Although I guess if your a corrupt preacher raking in the cash from the believers, end of faith would be the end of the world for you.

Actually, religious belief is an innate part of human nature.  You simply feel compelled to worship things that are greater than yourself be it money, political power, science, enlightenment, God, gods, community, military might, etc.

So essentially the only time there can be an end of faith/religious belief would be when humanity ceases to be, or ceases to be lower than any other entity and given the vast range of entities be it man-made or mystical, the idea that we will cease to have entites that are more powerful than any single individual is laughable at best.

In a way I could argue that much of economics, politics, and science is about man creating a god he can controll, or at least appear to controll.

[Kuari]

Its hard to say what will happen..  honestly a part of me wouldn't mind these prophecies being true because it'd point to there being something beyond the physical world...  but would be a pretty steep cost.  I don't think the world is going to end persay, but I get this nagging feeling that something big might happen...  maybe.  Hard telling.

[MT Hazard]

I heard somewhere that 'End of days' was meant to be the end of religious belief and the start of a new state of enlightenment, somehow it end up as the end of the world.

Although I guess if your a corrupt preacher raking in the cash from the believers, end of faith would be the end of the world for you.

Actually, religious belief is an innate part of human nature.  You simply feel compelled to worship things that are greater than yourself be it money, political power, science, enlightenment, God, gods, community, military might, etc.

So essentially the only time there can be an end of faith/religious belief would be when humanity ceases to be, or ceases to be lower than any other entity and given the vast range of entities be it man-made or mystical, the idea that we will cease to have entites that are more powerful than any single individual is laughable at best.

In a way I could argue that much of economics, politics, and science is about man creating a god he can controll, or at least appear to controll.

So if we become more than human, does that fulfil both conditions? An end of faith and the end of humanity?

I don't feel completed to worship anything, as do a lot of people, does that make them inhuman?

[Jack McSlay]

The solution, as you have just so aptly pointed out is that you add a fifth digit to the year display. However, as you have also pointed out, not all devices can display a fifth digit, which leaves us with the original problem.

I question how many of today's devices will be alive nearly 8000 years from now anyway.

I might point out I tried to display the 9223372036854775807 (maximum number for a 64-bit integer) timestamp once and my pc took several seconds to do so, but that woudn't be an issue on computers millions of times more powerful than mine we might have on year 9999.

The only reason of concern in the computing area are the extinction of free IP adresses. They're estimated to run out in 2010-2011, with IPv6 transition apparently not being efficient enough

[Kasarn]

The solution, as you have just so aptly pointed out is that you add a fifth digit to the year display. However, as you have also pointed out, not all devices can display a fifth digit, which leaves us with the original problem.

I question how many of today's devices will be alive nearly 8000 years from now anyway.

That's the point of the scenario I gave.
In our society, using the Gregorian calender, how many people use the Mayan calender? Not many, so we can pretty much say whatever we like about it and there are few people to correct misconceptions.
In a future society, using a different calender, how many people will use the Gregorian calender? Not many, so they can pretty much say whatever they like about it and there would be few people to correct misconceptions.

[Reese Tora]

The solution, as you have just so aptly pointed out is that you add a fifth digit to the year display. However, as you have also pointed out, not all devices can display a fifth digit, which leaves us with the original problem.

I question how many of today's devices will be alive nearly 8000 years from now anyway.

That's the point of the scenario I gave.
In our society, using the Gregorian calender, how many people use the Mayan calender? Not many, so we can pretty much say whatever we like about it and there are few people to correct misconceptions.
In a future society, using a different calender, how many people will use the Gregorian calender? Not many, so they can pretty much say whatever they like about it and there would be few people to correct misconceptions.

You know, Archaeologists aren't sure if the Mayan calendar rolls over to the next piktun starts when the mayan calendar would reach 13 B'ak'tun(December 20, 2012), or when it reaches the end of the possible cycle (ie: when it reaches 20 B'ak'tun, roughly 2786 years from now, 1,049,263 days after December 20th, 2012)

If their calendar continues out to 20 B'ak'tun, the first date is, as I mentioned, their equivalent to a big round number like our year 2000, the second is their equivalent to our reaching the year 10000. (a bigger round number, for those playing at home.)

Of course, if there were a fencepost error in translation, it could be the important day could actually 13.19.19.17.19 or 14.0.0.0.0, which is about 510 years from now. (And I bet that someone will pring that up if modern civilization is at all around in five hundred years. )

[Valynth]

I heard somewhere that 'End of days' was meant to be the end of religious belief and the start of a new state of enlightenment, somehow it end up as the end of the world.

Although I guess if your a corrupt preacher raking in the cash from the believers, end of faith would be the end of the world for you.

Actually, religious belief is an innate part of human nature.  You simply feel compelled to worship things that are greater than yourself be it money, political power, science, enlightenment, God, gods, community, military might, etc.

So essentially the only time there can be an end of faith/religious belief would be when humanity ceases to be, or ceases to be lower than any other entity and given the vast range of entities be it man-made or mystical, the idea that we will cease to have entities that are more powerful than any single individual is laughable at best.

In a way I could argue that much of economics, politics, and science is about man creating a god he can controll, or at least appear to controll.

So if we become more than human, does that fulfil both conditions? An end of faith and the end of humanity?

I don't feel completed to worship anything, as do a lot of people, does that make them inhuman?

You worship without knowing you worship and there is lies the pitfalls of the human-made dieties.  For example, the president of the United States wields power over a population of 300+ million.  How is he able to do so?  Simple.  He is impowered by his followers through prayers(votes) and the various pantheons of lower dieties(advisers, congressmen, etc).

Just by the fact you willingly give anything outside yourself more power than you yourself can create, you are, in a sense, worshiping it.  And while the power said philosophy or agency would gain from a single individual is less than the total psychological power of the person, the fact that it can gain worship from multiple people allows said superior entity to assume a near godlike power to the single individuals that looks at the philosophy/agency.

For example, just look at economics.  It's all about who believes what about what product.  The product could be completely useless to everyone, but if some one who has gained enough respect(or worship) wants an item, said item suddenly becomes the most valuable thing on the economic market.

In short, what I'm arguing is that A)  Humans need a hierarchy in order to function peacefully, B)  Humans that are lower in the hierarchy look up to those above them, and C) The power that determines much of the hierarchy is psychological and therefore can't be universally quantified.  Notice how I avoided using numbers throughout my reasoning and that numbers don't necessarily reflect power.

[aserath]

For December 21, 2012

My Prediction is: Nothing happens at all. Just life as usual. BUT if the world does end I think it will be fun to watch.

[Rakala]

People have been trying to predict the end of the world since.... the beginning of the world. If it ends, great. If it doesn't, great.

[Prof B Hunnydew]

For December 21, 2012

My Prediction is: Nothing happens at all. Just life as usual. BUT if the world does end I think it will be fun to watch.

It seems that the more widely know an end date is the more likely it is wrong.....The Mayan calendar ends on this date, because the planetary plane and the galaxy plane of the Milky Way line up.  Now the New Agers think that something will happen to Earth when it lines up the center of the galaxy. 

But I am more worry about a rogue planet 4-8 times the mass of the Earth headed this way.  It is orbit is said to be nearly 90 degree off the ecliptic. It's closest flyby to Earth in the late spring and summer 2012.  It will not bring the end of the world, but the destruction it causes will make it easier for a one world government to take over.

I am soon the government will have It's favorite people hidden away somewhere before then.

PBH

[Reese Tora]

The Mayan calendar ends on this date, because the planetary plane and the galaxy plane of the Milky Way line up.  Now the New Agers think that something will happen to Earth when it lines up the center of the galaxy. 

That's a new one by me, do you have a source onn that?(sounds more like something some newager scare monger made up)

But I am more worry about a rogue planet 4-8 times the mass of the Earth headed this way.  It is orbit is said to be nearly 90 degree off the ecliptic. It's closest flyby to Earth in the late spring and summer 2012.  It will not bring the end of the world, but the destruction it causes will make it easier for a one world government to take over.

Ah, the infamous planet X, which doesn't actually exist.
No, it's not being hidden, something like that would be easily detected both for that it would have a gravitational effect on everything else and for that it would have to intersect the plane of the ecliptic near where the earth's orbit is, and it would be anywhere from 1.6 to 2 times as far across, with the amount of mass you cited, making it clearly visible in previous passes through the solar system(Mars and Venus are both clearly visible  in the sky where the sun does not hide them, and both are roughly the same diameter as earth... mars is 2.3 AU from us at this moment and still clearly visible, planet X could be no more than 2 AU from us as it passes through the plane of the ecliptic), which would have had to occur with a relatively short period(say something in the range of the outer planets' orbital periods at the higher end).  It would have been noted by ancient peoples as the other planets were

In any case, the discovery of such a body could not be covered up because it would be announced discovered long before it was discovered that it had any sort of apocalyptic course, and it would still be easily detectable to other astronomers.

--edit--

I suggest watching some videos from Phil Plait, AKA The Bad Astronomer
http://www.youtube.com/user/TheBadAstronomer

[Prof B Hunnydew]

USA TODAY on the Mayan's end times. 

I don't share the believe about the Mayan's calendar, and the alignment of the solar system and the galaxy, But the above link tells something about the debate...

I will and my links on planet X later....


PBH

[Alondro]

I had a dream Saturday night about the world getting smacked by a planet and blowing up!  But it wasn't Planet X!  No no, it was dwarf planet Eris, knocked from its oribit and sent careening toward us by a passing black hole!  IT COULD HAPPEN!  WHICH MEANS IT WILL!!!   D:

It was a cool dream.  It was in snippets of a number of days as it got closer and closer, always getting larger in the twilight sky (as it was heading toward Earth at an oblique angle from behind, which meant its impact was a relatively slow collision and made possible what happened last in the dream... which was the impact itself.  The planets smooshed together, opening up huge volcanic rifts all over the Earth and destroying all life as the heat of impact liquified both worlds (and thus a brand new planet came to be, I guess.  The dream ended after I died.)   

It was quite a neat dream, as my brain is excellent with details.  For instance, Eris had a huge cometary halo as it approached, a consequence of its frozen nitrogen and other gasses heating and escaping as it drew in toward the Sun.  It was just so realistic.  I could even feel the heat of the lava as the cracks opened up and every living thing perished.

But you know... it wasn't just a dream... IT WAS A VISION OF THE FUTURE!  REPENT FOR THE END IS NEAR!  WE SHALL ALL BE BURNINATED!!!   D:

There's no hope now.  Clearly, I have been given the image of our doom.  Well, only one thing left to do!   

PS:  I suppose I should start a cult too.