|
Dear Readers:
Welcome to the first issue of Volume 5 of J.UCS. I trust you will
find the papers of interest. Please try to advertise J.UCS a bit with
your friends and colleagues: encourage them both to have a look at it
once in a while and also to consider it as possible medium for
publication!
Yours cordially,

Hermann Maurer, Managing Editor
Graz University of Technology, Graz / Austria
email: hmaurer@iicm.edu
PS: This is not only the beginning of Volume 5 of JUCS, but also
the beginning of the year 1999. We all have been reminded many times
already that this is a very special year: the media keep calling it
the last year of the millenium. But it certainly is NOT, it's only the
last but one year! The reason for this is that there is no year
0. There is a year 1 B.C. (i.e. a year -1) and a year 1 A.D. (i.e. a
year +1), but according to all large encyclopedias I checked no year
0! Have you ever thought about the other funny consequences, beyond
the fact that the start of the third millenium is Jan.1, 2001 and not
Jan.1, 2000? When you count how many years there are between two years
you always just subtract: i.e. it took e.g. 4 years to get from August
1993 to August 1997, right? ( 1997 - 1993 = 4 ). However, such
subtractions give the wrong result if you cross the border between
B.C. and A.D.: the temple that was built between August 5
B.C. (i.e. year - 5) to August 3 A.D. ( i.e. year +3) did not require
3 - (-5) = 8 years to build, but just 7 years! Here is another
curiosity: when was Jesus born? Since he was not born exactly at the
time of change of years he was born at some point in some year. This
year must be either 1 B.C. (But how can this be? Jesus lived already
at the end of that year!) or 1 A.D. (But how can this be? At the
beginning of 1 A.D. he was not born yet!). Thus, maybe there should be
a year 0, after all (the year in which the birth of Jesus occured)...
but this is NOT how years are counted in historical publications!
There is one further complicating exception: in astronomy they use the
year 0 (!) which makes the correlation of historic dates and
astronomical dates dicey! Well, sorry for bothering you with such
non-J.UCS related matters, but it is carneval time, so this is my
excuse!
|