Hello calbear304,
Because October 4 has already passed this year, the person would be
53. To calculate the age, we take 2002 and subtract 1949. We get the
result of 53 years old.
If the birthday had been on December 28, the age would be 52 because
we have not yet reached December 28.
I recommend the following website to accurately calculate age:
http://www.geocities.com/kongutamil2002/fun3
Enter 10 for month, 4 for Date, and 1949 for year and click on
Calculate.
Hopefully this is the answer you were looking for. If you need any
clarifications, let me know and I will do my best to further assist
you.
tisme-ga
Search strategy:
"calculate your age"
://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=%22calculate+your+age%22&meta= |
Request for Answer Clarification by
calbear304-ga
on
06 Dec 2002 09:10 PST
http://www.geocities.com/kongutamil2002/fun3 calculated 52 when I
entered October 4, 1949! Isn't it 52 instead of 53?
|
Clarification of Answer by
tisme-ga
on
06 Dec 2002 09:13 PST
Hello calbear304,
After entering '10' for month, '4' for date, and '1949' for years I
get:
"You are 53 years old & you were born on a Tuesday"
It might be using your computer's date and time, so please ensure that
your operating system's date and time is properly set.
Hope this helps,
tisme-ga
|
Request for Answer Clarification by
calbear304-ga
on
06 Dec 2002 09:19 PST
Hello again,
I checked my computer and it is properly set at Friday, December 06,
2002. I entered October 4, 1949 on that site, since it would not
accept 10-4-1949 and got the answer 52. This is an easy question, but
I still think it is 52. Please confirm your answer. Thanks.
|
Clarification of Answer by
tisme-ga
on
06 Dec 2002 09:25 PST
Hello calbear304,
You are getting different results than I am... I still get 53 years.
Think of it this way:
A baby born on October 4, 1999.
2002 - 1999 = 3 years old (not 4).
Birthday number 1 would be on October 4, 2000.
Birthday 2 would be on October 4, 2001.
Birthday 3 would have been on October 4, 2002.
tisme-ga
|
Request for Answer Clarification by
calbear304-ga
on
06 Dec 2002 09:29 PST
Hello there,
Of course, you're correct! I wasn't thinking. . .
|
Clarification of Answer by
tisme-ga
on
06 Dec 2002 09:31 PST
Great! Glad that I was able to help.
tisme-ga
|