On 2014-11-04 22:26, Steve Allen wrote:
Guinot explained this using the term "graduation second" in section 2.2 of 1995 Metrologia 31 431 http://iopscience.iop.org/0026-1394/31/6/002 He points out that the way the IAU has written the definitions of the time scales uses a subtly ambiguous notation. He writes The numerical value of UT1(IERS)-TAI does not of course, express a duration. In this context, the "s" only conveys the information that the readings of the two time scales are expressed in graduation seconds.
Thank you for that information! Yes, not every quantity with dimension time is a duration, let alone a duration of proper time. The difference between clock readings need not relate to proper time, and not even to the same time scale. A few operations with durations of differing time scales are considered to result in durations (eg, a weighted average of durations measured in different time scales), but most can not. And a sedimentation rate (a quotient velocity/acceleration) can not be considered as a duration, nor as the result of any other operation with time scales. Nevertheless, all these quantities have the dimension of time and can therefore be expressed with the SI unit for time, even though the SI second is (currently) defined as a duration of proper time. This is essential for the meaningful operations that one wants to perform with these quantities (differences of clock readings, averages of durations), but it also makes many meaningless operations possible (such as subtracting a sedimentation rate from a clock reading). Michael Deckers. _______________________________________________ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com https://pairlist6.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
