 |
|
|
| Author |
Message |
External
Since: Jan 13, 2006
Posts: 4
|
(Msg. 1) Posted: Fri Jan 13, 2006 5:50 pm
Post subject: question about Foundation dates
Archived from groups: alt>books>isaac-asimov (more info?)
|
|
|
Hello,
I'm French so excuse my very bad language.
I'v a question since many years about the begin of Foundation, and no answer
:
The texte says :
"Hari Seldon... born in the 11,988th year of the Galactic Era: died 12,069.
The dates are more commonly given in terms of the current Foundational Era
as -79 to the year 1 F.E. ..."
Does it mean that -79 FE is corresponding to 11,988 GE and 1 FE is
corresponding to 12,069 GE ?
But between 11,988 and 12,069 there are 82 years (including limits)
and between -79 and 1 there are only 80 years (including limits and without
zero year).
So there is a problem, isn't it ?
Do you have an explaination ? I can't imagin that the writer made a so big
mistake.
Thanks.
Jean-Claude
www.asimov.fr.st - Isaac Asimov, un monde de science-fiction
- - - " La violence est le dernier refuge de l'incompétence " - - - |
|
| Back to top |
|
 | |
External
Since: Jan 17, 2006
Posts: 1
|
(Msg. 2) Posted: Tue Jan 17, 2006 3:02 pm
Post subject: Re: question about Foundation dates [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
I think that you should assume that there is a year 0 in the FE, in
which case the Good Doctor is only off by one year.
That kind of mistake is easy to make, and considering that Asimov
didn't put a *lot* of work into making the Foundation stories perfectly
consistent, it's not surprising that something like that might slip
past him.
(At one point he reports that in the 1960's a fan brought him a small
pile of papers listing all the internal inconsistencies in the
Foundation Trilogy.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Sep 26, 2003
Posts: 33
|
(Msg. 3) Posted: Tue Jan 17, 2006 7:00 pm
Post subject: Re: question about Foundation dates [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On Tue, 17 Jan 2006, John H. Jenkins wrote:
>
>
> I think that you should assume that there is a year 0 in the FE, in
> which case the Good Doctor is only off by one year.
Couldn't it be that the calenders start the year on different days?
3ch >> Stay informed about: question about Foundation dates |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jan 13, 2006
Posts: 4
|
(Msg. 4) Posted: Sat Jan 21, 2006 8:32 pm
Post subject: Re: question about Foundation dates [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
"John H. Jenkins" <jhjenkins.DeleteThis@mac.com> a écrit dans le message de news:
1137538925.835997.238140.DeleteThis@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> I think that you should assume that there is a year 0 in the FE, in
> which case the Good Doctor is only off by one year.
>
> That kind of mistake is easy to make, and considering that Asimov
> didn't put a *lot* of work into making the Foundation stories perfectly
> consistent, it's not surprising that something like that might slip
> past him.
>
> (At one point he reports that in the 1960's a fan brought him a small
> pile of papers listing all the internal inconsistencies in the
> Foundation Trilogy.)
>
With à zéro year, you also have 81 years, and not 82 !
JC >> Stay informed about: question about Foundation dates |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jan 13, 2006
Posts: 4
|
(Msg. 5) Posted: Sat Jan 21, 2006 8:36 pm
Post subject: Re: question about Foundation dates [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
<colonel_hack.DeleteThis@yahoo.com> a écrit dans le message de news:
20060117184921.B58480.DeleteThis@nonsuch.ronnet.moc...
> On Tue, 17 Jan 2006, John H. Jenkins wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > I think that you should assume that there is a year 0 in the FE, in
> > which case the Good Doctor is only off by one year.
> Couldn't it be that the calenders start the year on different days?
>
> 3ch
I think it would be very difficult to change le dates, so that Terminus has
a lot of links with others planets thru the galaxy (not at the begining but
after). Strange...
JC >> Stay informed about: question about Foundation dates |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Sep 26, 2003
Posts: 33
|
(Msg. 6) Posted: Tue Jan 24, 2006 9:30 pm
Post subject: Re: question about Foundation dates [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On Sat, 21 Jan 2006, Jean-Claude wrote:
> I think it would be very difficult to change le dates, so that Terminus has
> a lot of links with others planets thru the galaxy (not at the begining but
> after). Strange...
Well, almost any planet with distinct seasons (so a tilt or a fairly
eccentric orbit. Or, I guess a double star would work) is likely to have
it's own local calender as well as. When the empire falls, most would go
to just the local calender. When order is re-established a transition
might be made to a standard calender, but maybe the year starts on
Seldon's birthday or some such change similar change.
There is also the possiblilty that the Trantor year used for the glactic
era dates may just be a different length than the Terminus year, (but they
are close). It may be that 82 years GE -is- 80 years FE, (Give me back my
two years! Give me back my two years!)
3ch >> Stay informed about: question about Foundation dates |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Apr 30, 2006
Posts: 3
|
(Msg. 7) Posted: Wed Feb 08, 2006 5:23 pm
Post subject: Re: question about Foundation dates [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Yeah - but think of it this way - someone born in 1906 who died in 1986
could be 79 if they died before their 1986 birthday.
PS: The days and years used throughout the galaxy in the Foundation Universe
for Interstellar purposes are based on the Earth Standard Day and Year.
"Jean-Claude" <jean-claude.monot.TakeThisOut@wanadoo.fr> wrote in message
news:43d28c43$0$19702$8fcfb975@news.wanadoo.fr...
>
> "John H. Jenkins" <jhjenkins.TakeThisOut@mac.com> a écrit dans le message de news:
> 1137538925.835997.238140.TakeThisOut@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>> I think that you should assume that there is a year 0 in the FE, in
>> which case the Good Doctor is only off by one year.
>>
>> That kind of mistake is easy to make, and considering that Asimov
>> didn't put a *lot* of work into making the Foundation stories perfectly
>> consistent, it's not surprising that something like that might slip
>> past him.
>>
>> (At one point he reports that in the 1960's a fan brought him a small
>> pile of papers listing all the internal inconsistencies in the
>> Foundation Trilogy.)
>>
>
>
> With à zéro year, you also have 81 years, and not 82 !
>
> JC
>
> >> Stay informed about: question about Foundation dates |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: May 14, 2006
Posts: 1
|
(Msg. 8) Posted: Sun May 14, 2006 6:14 pm
Post subject: Re: question about Foundation dates [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
At the end of Forward the Foundation in Seldon's death scene, which would be
12,069 GE or 1 FE, he writes "I have done a great deal in my eighty-one
years." So at that rate he would have been born in 11,988. N'est-ce pas?
And at the beginning of Prelude to Foundation it says, "Cleon I... born in
the year 11,988 of the Galactic Era, the same year in which Hari Seldon was
born. (It is thought that Seldon's birthdate, which some consider doubtful,
may have been adjusted to match that of Cleon.)"
"Jean-Claude" <jean-claude.monot RemoveThis @wanadoo.fr> wrote in message
news:43c7da2a$0$29200$8fcfb975@news.wanadoo.fr...
> Hello,
>
> I'm French so excuse my very bad language.
>
> I'v a question since many years about the begin of Foundation, and no
> answer
> :
> The texte says :
> "Hari Seldon... born in the 11,988th year of the Galactic Era: died
> 12,069.
> The dates are more commonly given in terms of the current Foundational Era
> as -79 to the year 1 F.E. ..."
>
> Does it mean that -79 FE is corresponding to 11,988 GE and 1 FE is
> corresponding to 12,069 GE ?
> But between 11,988 and 12,069 there are 82 years (including limits)
> and between -79 and 1 there are only 80 years (including limits and
> without
> zero year).
>
> So there is a problem, isn't it ?
> Do you have an explaination ? I can't imagin that the writer made a so big
> mistake.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Jean-Claude
>
> www.asimov.fr.st - Isaac Asimov, un monde de science-fiction
> - - - " La violence est le dernier refuge de l'incompétence " - - -
> >> Stay informed about: question about Foundation dates |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
|
You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Profile
Private Messages
Log in/Register/Password
