-Z- (Z@Gundam.Com)
Tue, 28 Dec 1999 19:03:23 -0800

At 17:29 12/28/1999 -0800, you wrote:

>* Meanwhile, Shindosha's venerable timeline indicates that UC years that
>are multiples of 4 are leap years (witness the date of February 29, UC
>0088, listed for an event in ZZ). Assuming this is true, UC 0080 must
>also be a leap year.

This is also a "gimme" -- you've got to account for leap years somehow and
the easiest way to do it is to map them to modulo 4, just as we do in the
Gregorian calendar. (Leap year numbers are divisible by 4, with the
exception of century years, which are leap years only if they are divisible
by 400. UC 0100, UC 0200 and UC 0300 would not be leap years.)

>Thus, UC 0080 is both a leap year _and_ a year in which January 14 falls
>on a Monday. That narrows it down to a pretty small range of candidates.
>Here's two centuries' worth:
> UC 0080 = UC 0001 =
> AD 2036 AD 1957
> AD 2064 AD 1985
> AD 2104 AD 2025
> AD 2132 AD 2053
> AD 2160 AD 2081
> AD 2188 AD 2109
> AD 2228 AD 2149
> ... ...
>Of these, AD 1957 is a cute option - the year Sputnik launched! - but if
>we've moved half the human race into space already, I haven't noticed. AD
>1985 isn't really pegged to any historical event, but it still gives us
>12 years to found Von Braun City, and it puts UC 0079 just about the date
>Tomino gave in his original series proposal. AD 2053 is probably going to
>be Dafydd's pick, since it's closest to the 2045 date from the older

How well you know me! It also fits neatly with your own estimate that it
took about a decade to construct the first permanent colony. It gets
whittled down to 8 years, but the next possible calendar adoption date is
2081 AD, a full 36 years (nearly one and a half generations)
down. Considering how quickly they constructed the subsequent colonies and
evacuated the planet, that's stretching it a bit. It also puts a severe
squeeze on Turn-A's 2345 dateline if that turns out to be AD and not UC.

Of course, if we follow the line of reasoning that says that the first
one's the hardest and things speed up geometrically thereafter, then we
could take the "century" part of UC literally and set UC 0001 at 2149 AD,
over a hundred years after construction began.

But, you know, no matter which of the dates that you present I go with, it
kicks the hell out of my Asian traditional calendar conversion table....

> Not compatible with the above two conditions: AD 1969, when man first
>set foot on the moon, and longtime fan fave AD 2001. Neither is
>compatible with January 14, UC 0080, being a Monday. And, although AD
>2013 meets both conditions, it would make UC 0088 equal to AD 2100 - not
>a leap year - and thus breaks the Shindosha timeline.

Speaking of calendars and dates they were adopted, the "New Style"
Gregorian calendar was only gradually adopted: Britain and its colonies,
including America, adopted it in 1752, when the error amounted to 11 days,
so that 3 September 3 1752 became 14 September 14 1752, and at the same
time the beginning of the year was put back from 25 March 25 to 1
January. (People rioted in the streets, demanding their 11 days
back....) Russia did not adopt the Gregorian calendar until the October
Revolution of 1917, so that the event (then 25 October 25) is currently
celebrated on 7 November.

BTW, thanks for bringing this up just in time for me to update my Gundam
timeline page over the New Year break! (That conversion table's going to
be a year bear, I just know it!)


Gundam Mailing List Archives are available at http://gundam.aeug.org/

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Wed Dec 29 1999 - 12:06:48 JST