octal and decimal roman number converter

In earlier times, different regions used different systems of numbering, not only measures of weight, distance or temperature, but also of time and chronology. In his work “The Easter Computus and the Origins of the Christian Era“, Alden Mosshammer, professor emeritus of history, notes:

The standard chronological reference in many ancient cities was the eponymous year—the name of the chief magistrate who served during that year. Some ancient historians also dated by reference to a numbered Olympiad, beginning with the first Olympic observance, traditionally dated to the summer of 776 BC. Where kings ruled, it was customary to number the years of the monarch. Numbering the years from the foundation of a city or an epochal date in its history was also common. A system of numbering the years by reference to a 15‐year period known as the Indiction, with a base‐date in AD 312/13 emerged in the eastern Empire. Some Christian writers numbered the years from the Creation of the cosmos, others from the Passion of Jesus. Each city had its own calendar, with different names for the month and a different point for the beginning of the year.

In doing so, modern revisionists have discovered that even the numbering systems themselves may have differed in the past: non-positional Roman numbers could have been recorded not only in the decimal style generally accepted today, but also in octal. I have made a simple web application for this kind of research:


Continue reading

erisian time

Back in the old days, the world was on many conflicting systems of keeping time. While three-quarters time might prevail in one area, elsewhere it was spare time or springtime or due time or ragtime.
Exactly 136 years ago a bunch of pundits from all over the world met in Washington, DC, and decided everyone should employ Standard Time (used by Standard Oil of New Jersey), based on Greenwich Mean Time (the time I was using in the meantime in Greenwich Village).
Far from perfect, this solution allows it to be one time in London at the exact moment it is some other time entirely in New York or San Francisco or Moscow.

Today, on this Daytime holiday, in coordination with Pope Crestomanci and the consensual decision of other respected Popes and Bishops of the New and Old World, we present the exact Erisian (Discordian) time. Discordian time is a single planetary decimal time. If in Christian time, the clock shows the correct time only in Greenwich Village and surroundings, then Erisian time on the whole planet is the same, that is, in some places the dawn is usually at 1 o’clock, while in the opposite side of the world it is at 6 o’clock. With this the beginning of Discordian day (0 hours, 0 minutes, 0 seconds) coincides with the beginning of Christian day on Easter Island on winter time (GMT-5). This means that the Erisian day starts 5 Christian hours later than the day in London (UTC ± 0:00).

As in the original decimal time system, there is 10 hours, 100 minutes in an hour, 100 seconds in a minute in a Discordian day. 10 hours per day – exactly as many fingers on both hands, without all these 12 apostles and 12 tribes.

1 Erisian hour = 0.1 days = 2.4 Christian hours
1 Erisian minute = 0.001 day = 1.44 Christian minute
1 Erisian second = 0.00001 day = 0.864 Christian second

In general, Discordian time coincides with the traditional decimal time (previously officially used in France and China), with a slight difference that Erisian time is the same for the whole planet, it has no time zones and is used within Discordian calendar.
At this address you can find out the exact discordinian time and date right now:


The source code for calculating time in javascript is published here: https://gitlab.com/zlax/dtime-js

ODD# V(a)/1,i;72Chs3186

basis of conquest/colonial/capitalist pr

Conquest, Colonialism, Сapitalism are all collective forms of interaction between one group of people and another. Such forms of group interaction become available due to the organization and collective actions of many different people with different interests, when they start to act for a common goal (family, tribal, class etc.)

A common language is not enough for the success of such collective forms of activity; such forms of domination of some people over others meet with natural counteraction. A common social philosophy or ideology is required to justify the advantages of some groups over others. Thanks to the introduction of the Prussian educational standard of education in most civilized countries of the world, the social philosophy of Darwinism has been instilled for several generations already, through a 10-year regime from bell to bell during puberty. Various national and class theories of Social Darwinism boil down to the fact that they proclaim struggle for existence, natural selection (survival of the fittest) and competition as the most important factors of evolution.

The postulates of Social Darwinism are well grounded in the social sciences. But Darwinism itself was initially poorly grounded in the natural sciences and even rejected by academies, after confirmation of Gregor Johann Mendel’s discoveries about genetic inheritance. In order to preserve the authority of Darwinism and its influence on the social sciences, academicians developed a synthetic theory of evolution. It is extremely important for the academic community to maintain this dilapidated evolutionary foundation, since all academicians without exception are fittest in the competition for academic titles, and the academic hierarchy is based on Social Darwinism.

But meanwhile, the evolutionary model of Kropotkin has long been known in the non-academic natural-scientific scholar community: Mutual Aid – A Factor of Evolution. This evolutionary theory, published 117 years ago, is well grounded, threre are many examples of stable and thriving populations prone to intraspecific and, especially, interspecific mutual aid. Animal and human examples demonstrate the advantages of mutual aid over primitive natural selection (at the time of publication, Darwinism had not yet been disproved by discoveries in the field of inheritance):


Although Social Kropotkinism potentially level out academic, national and other authorities based on Social Darwinism, Kropotkin’s very model of evolution is the most scientifically sound theoretical basis for describing current biological diversity.

ODD# V(a)/2,iv;9Afm3185