Peter Lothberg <r...@stupi.se> wrote: > And I forgot: They made a "mistake" and missed their intentions of a > solar day year 1900 when defining the atomic second. Off by 2s in 100 > years.
No that is not correct, or at least it's nowhere near as simple as that. The atomic second was matched to the second of ephemeris time, and that was based on Newcomb's tables of the sun, which in effect used the average length of the second from the 1800s. http://ucolick.org/~sla/leapsecs/dutc.html Tony. -- f.anthony.n.finch <d...@dotat.at> http://dotat.at/ Viking, North Utsire, South Utsire: Southeasterly 4 or 5, increasing 6 at times. Moderate. Occasional rain, fog patches. Moderate, occasionally very poor.
