Stardates

[Shamrock Holmes]

I've always been quite keen on the concept of a universally understood dating system known in the short hand as 'stardates'. However, as with many others concepts in Star Trek I believe there are serious flaws in the implementation.

My preferred version of the system is the TNG system which appears to be the most consistently applied and the least directly tied to the modern Western calendar. However, it does still have the problem that its 'Zero Date' is inadequate and of no obvious significance.

My research has suggested that the '1000 days a year' notion approximates a period time of four 'galactic nano-months' (4 x 1-billionth of the rotation period of the Milky Way [82 Terran Days]).

Due to the massive epochal range of the full Galactic Star Date, something like a "Federation Truncated Galactic Star Date" would be used in regular communication (with the GSD encoded in the electronic records). The most sensible 'Zero Date' for the truncated system would seem to be the founding of the Federation (Earth Date 12 August 2161), and it would otherwise follow the TNG formula.

For example:

1) The Battle of Narenda III would be approximately SD 21625 on the 'canon' system and SD 183016/83016 (17th August [23]44, assuming it took place exactly twenty-two years before "Yesterday's Enterprise").
2) "Encounter at Farpoint" would take place approximately SD 203545/03545 (26th February [23]64).
3) "Emissary" would take place approximately SD 207770/07770 (19th May [23]69).
4) "Caretaker" would take place approximately SD 210707/10707 (26th April [23]71).
5) "Endgame" would take place approximately SD 216364/16364 (22nd December [23]77).
6) "Star Trek: Nemesis" would take place approximately SD218236/18236 (5th November [23]79).

Under the above system, one "stardate" would equal about 8 hrs 46 minutes which matches roughly the length of a "watch" in a "three watches per ship's day" system.

Any thoughts?

 

[STEPhon IT]

Too much time on your hands.

 

[Shamrock Holmes]

Too much time on your hands.

Well, I am on holiday this week.

Any helpful thoughts anyone?

 

[psCargile]

Imparting some reality into the fiction of Star Trek, a stardate would not be centric to human calendars, but be a compromise between the star faring members of the Federation. No "zero date" is really necessary. One measure flows into the next much like the adoption of the Gregorian calendar, where whole days were skipped.

 

[Shamrock Holmes]

Imparting some reality into the fiction of Star Trek, a stardate would not be centric to human calendars, but be a compromise between the star faring members of the Federation. No "zero date" is really necessary. One measure flows into the next much like the adoption of the Gregorian calendar, where whole days were skipped.

I'm pretty sure every calendar has a 'zero day' even if it's long before any point that would be needed by the users of said calendar. For instance, the Julian Day Calendar uses a 'zero date' in either 4713 or 4714 BC (depending on either Julian or Gregorian calendar) and the Talmudic Calendar 'zeroes' in either c 1,000 BC or c 2,000 BC depending on method, but wasn't implemented until 600 to 300 BC.

As far as being "human-centric", that's very true, which is why I favour the "1,000 units" as it would be a purely mathematical structure based on fractions of a universally observable and measurable phenomenon (rotation of the Galaxy) which subject to measurement drift eventually would likely be similar through Federation and Allied territories and certainly virtually the same for the UFP founders.

Sham

 

[psCargile]

Yes, every calendar has a zero day.

 

[PhaserLightShow]

I have a Stardate formula. It would not fit with canon but it is a simple system. To the left of the decimal point, you have to year. To the right, you have the month number, than the day number.

Example:
January 1, 2016 (1/1/2016) = 2016.11
December 31, 2016 (31/12/2016) = 2016.1231

How to use...
A=Year
B=Month
C=Year
Stardate=A.BC

 

[Shamrock Holmes]

I have a Stardate formula. It would not fit with canon but it is a simple system. To the left of the decimal point, you have to year. To the right, you have the month number, than the day number.

Example:
January 1, 2016 (1/1/2016) = 2016.11
December 31, 2016 (31/12/2016) = 2016.1231

How to use...
A=Year
B=Month
C=Day
Stardate=A.BC

Probably the best system for rendering Earth dates. But far to "Earth-centric" to work as a "Stardate" system (tho I believe the Abramsverse does a variation), especially if the full system predates the Federation (The Xindi and pre-Fed Vulcans are both familiar with the system during the 2100s).

 

[PhaserLightShow]

Probably the best system for rendering Earth dates. But far to "Earth-centric" to work as a "Stardate" system (tho I believe the Abramsverse does a variation), especially if the full system predates the Federation (The Xindi and pre-Fed Vulcans are both familiar with the system during the 2100s).

But it would work in the Mirror universe, where Earth Terrans control everything

 

[Shamrock Holmes]

But it would work in the Mirror universe, where Earth Terrans control everything

Fair point.

 

[PhaserLightShow]

Probably the best system for rendering Earth dates. But far to "Earth-centric" to work as a "Stardate" system (tho I believe the Abramsverse does a variation), especially if the full system predates the Federation (The Xindi and pre-Fed Vulcans are both familiar with the system during the 2100s).

Abrams does:
A=Year
B=Percent Through Year (365 divided by day of year)

January 1, 2265
2265.000