The following (which is self-explanatory) is taken from the "Letters To The Editor" section of today's Atlantic City Press.....

Math prof: Toast

millennium in 2000

Many people firmly believe that the new millennium actually starts in 2001. I have read about this in letters here and elsewhere. I have even had heated discussions about this with some of my friends. The argument goes something like this: The first millennium goes from 1 to 1000; the second, from 1001 to 2000; the third, from 2001 to 3000; and so on.

The problem is, time doesn't move in jumps of one year; time flows continuously. When counting time like that, one loses a whole year each millennium: the year from 0 to 1 in the first millennium, from 1000 to 1001 in the second, and so on.

Some people argue: But if you start counting the new millennium from the year 2000, then this one will have had 999 years, and not 1000! Well, that is not true, either: The first millennium started when western civilization decided to start counting time, year 0 (not year 1). At year 1, the first millennium was already 1 year old. Think of a baby: When we celebrate her first birthday, she is already 1 year old. The millennium we are now in (the second millennium) started on January 1, 1000, and will end on December 1, 1999. If you count carefully, you will see that it has exactly 1,000 years: the first year, from Jan. 1, 1000 to Dec. 31, 1000; the second, from Jan. 1, 1001, to Dec. 31, 1001; and so on, up to the 1000th, from Jan. 1, 1999, to Dec. 31, 1999.

In a nutshell: Sorry, guys, but if you wait until Jan. 1, 2001, to celebrate the new millennium, you will be one year too late.

If anybody has still questions regarding this issue, please feel free to call the mathematics program at Richard Stockton College, I, or any of my colleagues, will be happy to explain the matter further.

JUAN TOLOSA

Professor of Mathematics

Richard Stockton College

Pomona