THE YEAR „0“ (?)
I am talking about the year „0“ („zero“)
and its meaning, especially its calendrical significance.
The intention was to mark Christ's birth.
Today it is more likely to assume that Christ was born five or
seven years before the year 0. I am referring to astronomers here,
who interpreted the conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn as the „Star
of Bethlehem“. This conjunction took place in the year 7
to 5 BC. But nevertheless, the conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn
as the „Star of Bethlehem“ is not a sure evidence.
I am saying that the year „zero“ is not like the other
years, and this means that the year is merely similar to the mathematical
number zero, thus the year „zero“ does not exist like
the other years.
But I am also saying that the year „zero“ is accepted,
namely as a mark (Christ's birth) but not as a year like every
other year. Thus the year „zero“ does not exist as a
year but as a mark (and otherwise it is like nothing or like the
number zero).
The Year 0 is a mark (Christ's birth) which was put by the Christian
(Catholic) Church. That is the reason for the distinction of ante
Christum (before Christ) and post Christum
(after Christ). So the distinction of ante Christum
(before Christ) and post Christum (after Christ)
was intended. That does not require a year but a mark, namely
„0“.
The „year zero“ can't really be a year just because
of the definition of „zero“, but it can be a mark, can
make a distinction. That is what I am saying. And the church used
it in exactly that way.
If one has years before Christ and years after Christ,
then one can count backwards into the infinity and forwards into
the infinity. The church could say that it was Jesus as the hub
of the world who makes the difference, the holy distinction.
But my interest is the number zero - in both a natural sense
and a cultural sense.
Zero can be interpreted as nothing / nothingness, as the
beginning of the universe („big bang“), although that
beginning must be mathematically / logically false because of
the definition of „zero“, as a cultural mark (i.e. the
Occidental calendar), and of course as a mere number.
The „year 0“ is a cultural one, an occidental one,
and there is similarity to the „big bang“ because it
is also a cultural one, an occidental one. The similarity of both
means also that it is not possible to define what they really
are. The main difference of both is that we know what was before
the „year 0“ but do not know what was before the „big
bang“. This main difference means mainly that the „year
0“ is probably no nonsense because it is surely useful while
the „big bang“ is probably nonsense because it is surely
useless.
