Re: [LEAPSECS] LEAPSECS Digest, Vol 83, Issue 7
Maybe we should think about a press release and blog. I am sure we could do it through AGI. DF Sent from my iPad On Sep 19, 2013, at 12:01 AM, leapsecs-requ...@leapsecond.com leapsecs-requ...@leapsecond.com wrote: Send LEAPSECS mailing list submissions to leapsecs@leapsecond.com To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to leapsecs-requ...@leapsecond.com You can reach the person managing the list at leapsecs-ow...@leapsecond.com When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than Re: Contents of LEAPSECS digest... Today's Topics: 1. Re: joint BIPM/ITU meeting (Steve Allen) -- Message: 1 Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2013 09:43:53 -0700 From: Steve Allen s...@ucolick.org Subject: Re: [LEAPSECS] joint BIPM/ITU meeting To: Leap Second Discussion List leapsecs@leapsecond.com Message-ID: 20130917164353.ga7...@ucolick.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Fri 2013-09-13T06:57:45 -0700, Steve Allen hath writ: In stark contrast to the usual ITU-R pattern and the previous workshop held by BIPM at the Royal Society, the presentations for next week's workshop in Geneva are being published http://www.itu.int/oth/R0A0E96/en Most of the draft presentations are now available. ITU-R has also done a press release about the workshop. http://www.itu.int/net/pressoffice/press_releases/2013/Advisory-14.aspx -- Steve Allen s...@ucolick.orgWGS-84 (GPS) UCO/Lick Observatory--ISB Natural Sciences II, Room 165Lat +36.99855 1156 High StreetVoice: +1 831 459 3046 Lng -122.06015 Santa Cruz, CA 95064http://www.ucolick.org/~sla/ Hgt +250 m -- ___ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs End of LEAPSECS Digest, Vol 83, Issue 7 *** ___ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
Re: [LEAPSECS] LEAPSECS Digest, Vol 83, Issue 5
Wouldn't the problem go away if time stamps were just in UTC? Then other time zones involved in transactions would not ave to convert either. I will speak with the Emperor. DF ___ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
Re: [LEAPSECS] LEAPSECS Digest, Vol 82, Issue 24
As most know, I have been vetted for the workshop but cannot attend. Anyone of like mind and interest but in proximity to Geneva might be nominated to replace me. I believe that I can do that under whatever amorphous authority I have in ISO. Would anyone on this list wish to do that? DF ___ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
Re: [LEAPSECS] LEAPSECS Digest, Vol 72, Issue 1
Normalizing and fitting arbitrary curves to unqualified data is meaningless.I wonder how this is related to the temporal diversity of the heights of the pyramids of Kufu, Menkare, and Josher?This was also related to climate (Nile flooding or not) and economy (resources available after squandering on monuments and wars). It would be more credible if they started from a meaningful hypothesis and then determined how well the observations fit.I am curve fitting to prices on the lunch menu in order to determine whether global warming will influence my choice. DF ___ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
Re: [LEAPSECS] LEAPSECS Digest, Vol 72, Issue 1
Fool that I am, I was not challenging the statistical analysis, only the physical basis for the curve fits. I am sure that the marginalization and mathematics are sound and that the correlations are valid. The causal conjectures are understandably arguable. I know that I should never have taken the bait. DF -Original Message- From: Poul-Henning Kamp [mailto:p...@phk.freebsd.dk] Sent: Monday, November 05, 2012 12:01 PM To: Leap Second Discussion List; Finkleman, Dave Subject: Re: [LEAPSECS] LEAPSECS Digest, Vol 72, Issue 1 In message 3b33e89c51d2de44be2f0c757c656c880d56e...@mail02.stk.com, Finklema n, Dave writes: Normalizing and fitting arbitrary curves to unqualified data is meaningless. Just before you make a fool of yourself in public: Tamino is probably one of the sharpest minds out there when it comes to proper use of statistics, and he has the track record to prove it. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 p...@freebsd.org | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. ___ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
Re: [LEAPSECS] LEAPSECS Digest, Vol 71, Issue 4
With respect to Warner's statement about how robust leap seconds are, robust with respect to what application? IMO, the scheme is robust for those whose missions depend on Earth sync. It is not robust for those with at best casual interest and whose missions are hardly affected by leap second implementation anomalies. DF ___ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
[LEAPSECS] Derecho vs Leap Second
Can someone please decipher this for me. With great difficulty, I read the article in German. The blog with slightly less difficulty even though it was in sysadminese. What is the issue with two parallel time systems in LINUX? More to the point, would anything but leap second insertion have provoked the issues experienced? Dave Finkleman Senior Scientist Center for Space Standards and Innovation Analytical Graphics, Inc. 7150 Campus Drive Colorado Springs, CO 80920 Phone: 719-510-8282 or 719-321-4780 Fax: 719-573-9079 Discover CSSI data downloads, technical webinars, publications, and outreach events at www.CenterForSpace.com. ___ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
[LEAPSECS] Predictable Horizon and Uncertainty
The horizon of predictability reappears frequently in these discussions. That it is arguable leads me to suggest that some authoritative source distribute through IERS a reputable estimate and its uncertainty. Statistics of past events (admittedly a small sample) appear to be 3.5 years with an uncertainty somewhere between six months and a year. This would at least allow a window within which one should prepare and exercise. I am sure that I am repeating something that was discussed before I became a subscriber. Dave Finkleman Senior Scientist Center for Space Standards and Innovation Analytical Graphics, Inc. 7150 Campus Drive Colorado Springs, CO 80920 Phone: 719-510-8282 or 719-321-4780 Fax: 719-573-9079 Discover CSSI data downloads, technical webinars, publications, and outreach events at www.CenterForSpace.com. ___ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
Re: [LEAPSECS] LEAPSECS Digest, Vol 63, Issue 15
However, 9 times out of 10 chaos fails to materialize, because people tend to value a functioning society over the much predicted alternative. Well said, PHK. We will receive on Monday (I hope) from ISO TC37 an expert and attributable statement that if the time scale changes as recommended, it cannot retain the term UTC. I am diligently seeking to submit this for record or in person at the Radio Assembly and WRC. Incidentally, the terminological authority is Danish and perhaps not far from PHK. Hanne Erdman Thomsen [het@cbs.dk] Dave Finkleman Senior Scientist Center for Space Standards and Innovation Analytical Graphics, Inc. 7150 Campus Drive Colorado Springs, CO 80920 Phone: 719-510-8282 or 719-321-4780 Fax: 719-573-9079 Discover CSSI data downloads, technical webinars, publications, and outreach events at www.CenterForSpace.com. ___ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
Re: [LEAPSECS] LEAPSECS Digest, Vol 61, Issue 15
The response takes more than an email. Read our AAS paper delivered in Toronto in August 2010. I don't remember the number, but Google will work. There is a long matrix of impacts, most of which have nothing to do with looking for things in the sky. I am not an astronomer nor is my colleague John Seago, a strong presence in the debate. Taking advantage of posting something, the national positions on this issue are political, not technical positions. The US Department of State represents the Administration, which is not the same as representing the country or the people. Although the US DoS must convene Industrial Technical Advisory Committees (ITAC), these have little influence. The support teams convened to help the designated DoS representative on an international policy matter are overwhelmingly from government agencies. It is ironic that most of the rationale offered in this digest over many years was rejected by the US DoS delegation as non-technical. The situation in China is without much doubt political, not technical; as it was before China changed its mind. Dave Finkleman Senior Scientist Center for Space Standards and Innovation Analytical Graphics, Inc. 7150 Campus Drive Colorado Springs, CO 80920 Phone: 719-510-8282 or 719-321-4780 Fax: 719-573-9079 Discover CSSI data downloads, technical webinars, publications, and outreach events at www.CenterForSpace.com. ___ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
Re: [LEAPSECS] LEAPSECS Digest, Vol 61, Issue 12
Dealing with China through ISO developing space system standards, I conjecture that their motivation is to deprecate rest-of-world capabilities. China implemented modern technology very recently relative to the rest of the world. They would suffer much less than we would, if at all. I am certain that their motivation is greatest disadvantage to others with acceptable consequences for themselves. Dave Finkleman Senior Scientist Center for Space Standards and Innovation Analytical Graphics, Inc. 7150 Campus Drive Colorado Springs, CO 80920 Phone: 719-510-8282 or 719-321-4780 Fax: 719-573-9079 Discover CSSI data downloads, technical webinars, publications, and outreach events at www.CenterForSpace.com. ___ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
Re: [LEAPSECS] LEAPSECS Digest, Vol 60, Issue 26
Will the Proceedings be available for exposure to Radio Assembly and Radio Conference participants? In other words, within the next month or so? It was hard to decide between meetings in France and going to Exton again. Given the outcome, I probably should have gone to Exton! BTW: All three forms of the Proceedings cost $120.00. One would think that a CD ROM would be less expensive than a hard bound volume, but I guess not. Perhaps they might offer both a the one price? Dave Finkleman Senior Scientist Center for Space Standards and Innovation Analytical Graphics, Inc. 7150 Campus Drive Colorado Springs, CO 80920 Phone: 719-510-8282 or 719-321-4780 Fax: 719-573-9079 Discover CSSI data downloads, technical webinars, publications, and outreach events at www.CenterForSpace.com. ** ___ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
[LEAPSECS] ITU
I keep touch with the Department of State (DoS) delegation to the ITU. They appointed Benson to create the US position, so we know what that is. However, the information DoS has distributed includes the fact that ITU scope and responsibilities are under pressure. ITU is attempting to expand its scope to cyber security. There is much resistance, some of which manifests itself in recommendations to reduce ITU scope rather than increase it. Whether ITU should own UTC has been batted around outside of our concerns.Perhaps there is too much of greater significance on the plate for the WRC, and UTC will not be able to drain much deliberative energy. Dave Finkleman Senior Scientist Center for Space Standards and Innovation Analytical Graphics, Inc. 7150 Campus Drive Colorado Springs, CO 80920 Phone: 719-510-8282 or 719-321-4780 Fax: 719-573-9079 Discover CSSI data downloads, technical webinars, publications, and outreach events at www.CenterForSpace.com. ___ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
Re: [LEAPSECS] LEAPSECS Digest, Vol 57, Issue 9- Wikipedia UTC Citation
Wikipedia entries can be changed by anyone. I recommend that someone correct the recent modification that clouds the origin of the term UTC. They wait to see what happens. My experience follows. For nearly 10 years, AGI prepared and donated to NORAD continuous animations for NORAD Tracks Santa. About five years ago Google and Booz-Allen-Hamilton intimidated NORAD to use them instead, gaining exposure and advertising. The NORAD Tracks Santa Wikipedia page said that AGI had withdrawn. I changed it. 30 minutes later it was back the way it was. I changed it again. This went on throughout the Christmas season of 2009. By design and policy, contributions to Wikipedia pages are unconstrained except for immoral or abusive inputs. Perhaps someone can write a script that monitors the relevant passage and replaces it with the truth every time it changes. Dave Finkleman Senior Scientist Center for Space Standards and Innovation Analytical Graphics, Inc. 7150 Campus Drive Colorado Springs, CO 80920 Phone: 719-510-8282 or 719-321-4780 Fax: 719-573-9079 Discover CSSI data downloads, technical webinars, publications, and outreach events at www.CenterForSpace.com. ___ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
Re: [LEAPSECS] LEAPSECS Digest, Vol 56, Issue 1
SG7 declared inputs from leapsecond.com participants non-technical. Determining the strength of opinion is technical? Since when was science governed by opinion? Forever? Dave Finkleman Senior Scientist Center for Space Standards and Innovation Analytical Graphics, Inc. 7150 Campus Drive Colorado Springs, CO 80920 Phone: 719-510-8282 or 719-321-4780 Fax: 719-573-9079 Discover CSSI data downloads, technical webinars, publications, and outreach events at www.CenterForSpace.com. ___ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
Re: [LEAPSECS] LEAPSECS Digest, Vol 53, Issue 12
I agree very much with Poul-Henning. If everyone could agree on a well defined time scale, properly qualified, it doesn't matter what that is. In my life there have always been people who will not collaborate or compromise for reasons incomprehensible to me. I will re-read some of my John Nash books so that I can seek a non-zero sum optimization. (The best one yet is A Beautiful Math: John Nash, Game Theory, and the Modern Quest for a Code of Nature, by Tom Siegfried.) Dave Finkleman Senior Scientist Center for Space Standards and Innovation Analytical Graphics, Inc. 7150 Campus Drive Colorado Springs, CO 80920 Phone: 719-510-8282 or 719-321-4780 Fax: 719-573-9079 ___ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
Re: [LEAPSECS] LEAPSECS Digest, Vol 53, Issue 11
To answer tvb's question, there are contracts that require UTC explicitly. There is no qualification as to what UTC is or which version to use if there are several!!! Relatively recent US statute mandates UTC as the civil time scale. The only qualification is that whatever DoD and USNO think UTC should be is what it is. I don't have any specific contract examples at hand, but I am sure that there are many. Dave Finkleman Senior Scientist Center for Space Standards and Innovation Analytical Graphics, Inc. 7150 Campus Drive Colorado Springs, CO 80920 Phone: 719-510-8282 or 719-321-4780 Fax: 719-573-9079 Discover CSSI data downloads, technical webinars, publications, and outreach events at www.CenterForSpace.com. ___ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
Re: [LEAPSECS] LEAPSECS Digest, Vol 53, Issue 8
We keep talking about the ITU as though it were a coherent decision making enterprise. After my visit there last week, I am convinced that it is not. The decisions are made by Working Parties and Study Groups and confirmed by Radio Assemblies leading to final approval by the WRC. The ITU only administers these bodies. As an entity, it has no authority or ability to influence outcomes. The ITU is furniture. The influence comes from the butts in the seats. Dave Finkleman Senior Scientist Center for Space Standards and Innovation Analytical Graphics, Inc. 7150 Campus Drive Colorado Springs, CO 80920 Phone: 719-510-8282 or 719-321-4780 Fax: 719-573-9079 Discover CSSI data downloads, technical webinars, publications, and outreach events at www.CenterForSpace.com. * ___ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
Re: [LEAPSECS] LEAPSECS Digest, Vol 53, Issue 5
Having very recently visited the ITU in Geneva, I am now absolutely certain that it is a purely administrative body with no power or desire to participate materially in technical matters and no technical capability to contribute. The organization's definition of due diligence is to run meetings, maintain registries, and execute the recommendation process. The lack of due diligence rests strongly with Study Groups and Working Parties. There is, in my opinion, no way to affect outcomes by working through the ITU directly. To me this means working with and helping delegations from Canada, the UK, etc., that have objected to the proposed change. Since few of the ITU member countries serve on SG7, we might also try to educate other delegations that can still contribute to the final judgement. I asked how stakeholders could challenge SG leadership assertion that concerns were not technical and therefore not eligible for consideration. The answer was that there is no way, and, as I reported, an SG chairman can forward anything after two failures to achieve consensus. This is the equivalent of the Polish Sejm in the early 16th century. The wealthy Magnates established Szlachta, the privilege of liberum veto. The king was selected generally from outside Poland. His privileges were severely limited, and the monarchy was not hereditary. Any Magnate could alone diminish the common good with overpowering, peremptory veto. Dave Finkleman Senior Scientist Center for Space Standards and Innovation Analytical Graphics, Inc. 7150 Campus Drive Colorado Springs, CO 80920 Phone: 719-510-8282 or 719-321-4780 Fax: 719-573-9079 Discover CSSI data downloads, technical webinars, publications, and outreach events at www.CenterForSpace.com. -Original Message- ___ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
[LEAPSECS] Visit to ITU-R
First, I could not retrieve the previous versions of 460-xx. No one I met with knew how to do that! I met with Mr. Yvon Henri, Chief, Space Services Department, ITU-R, and Venkatsubramanian Srivanasan, who works for him. They have nothing to do with UTC. They maintain Vol 1 of the Radio Regulations. They are familiar with the SG/WG processes. With regard to 460-6 moving forward to the Radio Assembly, they state that this is normal. They claim that consensus is rarely achieved in Study Groups and that Chairman often send on matters that lack consensus. They assert that the reason is that most failures to reach consensus are political. One or more disadvantaged countries tries to impede those that are more advanced. I asked why there were study groups if they had no power to deprecate unworthy items. They referred me to Colin Langtry, who seems to administer all study groups. I did not have time for that. Lest my visit not have been productive, they gave me a lapel pin! Fortunately, this was not the purpose of my trip to Geneva. I just received editors' feedback on the American Scientist article. I was overseas and unable to send copies to those who requested them. Now I am able. Please resend your requests to my work email (dfinile...@agi.com) so that I can attach a copy in response to each email. Dave Finkleman Senior Scientist Center for Space Standards and Innovation Analytical Graphics, Inc. 7150 Campus Drive Colorado Springs, CO 80920 Phone: 719-510-8282 or 719-321-4780 Fax: 719-573-9079 Discover CSSI data downloads, technical webinars, publications, and outreach events at www.CenterForSpace.com. -Original Message- From: leapsecs-boun...@leapsecond.com [mailto:leapsecs-boun...@leapsecond.com] On Behalf Of leapsecs-requ...@leapsecond.com Sent: Friday, April 08, 2011 10:01 AM To: leapsecs@leapsecond.com Subject: LEAPSECS Digest, Vol 53, Issue 2 Send LEAPSECS mailing list submissions to leapsecs@leapsecond.com To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to leapsecs-requ...@leapsecond.com You can reach the person managing the list at leapsecs-ow...@leapsecond.com When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than Re: Contents of LEAPSECS digest... Today's Topics: 1. ACM article (Steve Allen) 2. rewriting history of Torino Colloquium (Steve Allen) 3. Re: rewriting history of Torino Colloquium (Poul-Henning Kamp) 4. Re: rewriting history of Torino Colloquium (Rob Seaman) 5. Re: rewriting history of Torino Colloquium (Poul-Henning Kamp) -- Message: 1 Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2011 09:56:48 -0700 From: Steve Allen s...@ucolick.org Subject: [LEAPSECS] ACM article To: Leap Second Discussion List leapsecs@leapsecond.com Message-ID: 20110407165648.gr26...@ucolick.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii PHK's article seems to be here http://queue.acm.org/detail.cfm?id=1967009 -- Steve Allen s...@ucolick.orgWGS-84 (GPS) UCO/Lick Observatory--ISB Natural Sciences II, Room 165Lat +36.99855 1156 High StreetVoice: +1 831 459 3046 Lng -122.06015 Santa Cruz, CA 95064http://www.ucolick.org/~sla/ Hgt +250 m -- Message: 2 Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2011 18:49:44 -0700 From: Steve Allen s...@ucolick.org Subject: [LEAPSECS] rewriting history of Torino Colloquium To: Leap Second Discussion List leapsecs@leapsecond.com Message-ID: 20110408014944.ga10...@ucolick.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii When the ITU-R held its colloquium in Torino in 2003 the Italian institute was the IEN. Originally the proceedings were online at http://www.ien.it/luc/cesio/itu/ITU.shtml During subsequent reorganizations that became the INRIM. Until recently they had continued to host the proceedings of the 2003 colloquium at this URL http://www.inrim.it/luc/cesio/itu/ITU.shtml I was recently informed that this link is now dead. Much more to my surprise I find that there is no trace of it in the Internet Archive's wayback machine. Fortunately the wayback machine had crawled the original website, and during at least some of the many crawls the content was available. I suggest that anyone who wants not to forget history should grab a copy of the proceedings. -- Steve Allen s...@ucolick.orgWGS-84 (GPS) UCO/Lick Observatory--ISB Natural Sciences II, Room 165Lat +36.99855 1156 High StreetVoice: +1 831 459 3046 Lng -122.06015 Santa Cruz, CA 95064http://www.ucolick.org/~sla/ Hgt +250 m -- Message: 3 Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2011 08:52:16 + From: Poul-Henning Kamp p...@phk.freebsd.dk Subject: Re: [LEAPSECS] rewriting history of Torino Colloquium To:
[LEAPSECS] Leap Second Article in American Scientist
I am glad that the discussion picked up again. I think I missed precursors to the current thread. American Scientist has accepted for publication an article by John Seago, Ken Seidelmann, Steve Allen, Rob Seaman, and me. The editors are doing their thing so that we can come back at them by the end of April. I/we would appreciate feedback from those who contribute to this discussion group. I can't promise that we could pet everyone's pet rock, but it's better to have your criticism than to have challenges as letters to the editor. Recognize that the audience is technically capable but far from expert in this matter. The magazine circulation is 80,000, and the subjects are diverse. Although we managed to slip in forthcoming decision points, the objective is education rather than spin for influence. I don't know the best way to post the current draft or distribute it, but I bet someone on the discussion will let me know. Dave Finkleman Senior Scientist Center for Space Standards and Innovation Analytical Graphics, Inc. 7150 Campus Drive Colorado Springs, CO 80920 Phone: 719-510-8282 or 719-321-4780 Fax: 719-573-9079 Discover CSSI data downloads, technical webinars, publications, and outreach events at www.CenterForSpace.com. ___ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
Re: [LEAPSECS] LEAPSECS Digest, Vol 51, Issue 23
This discussion exposes the fact that we don't all have to work in the same reference frame or time system - as long as we understand what we are using and make it clear to users. Orbit data transfer standards developed by CCSDS and others require sufficient metadata that users can reproduce your results with the same outcome and transform your data into the time system and reference frame they wish to use. Metadata also includes characteristics of the geopotential model. There is no point in propagating to high order and degree initial information that was created at low order or degree, for example. Unfortunately, some operators don't know what is inside the black box. We accommodate this by requiring the fields but not the real content. If geopotential info fields are filled with default characters, we know that this idiot doesn't even know what he did and discount his input. Lying is another story. However, there are institutional sanctions for providing false information. Like, you get cut off from everyone else's data. These lessons came hard. For example, lack of gravitational metadata led to low perigee events in Superbird 6, a Comsat. The launch provider included lunar gravitation and the on-orbit operator did not. The handover state provided by the launch agency did not lead to the desired final orbit for the operator. With regard to what is significant and what is not. If someone raised the issue, then it must be significant to him. If the others don't care or it doesn't matter to them, it won't matter if they have the additional information or greater precision. I've said this before, We don't create standards for people who don't need them. We create standards for those who do need them. The don't cares usually don't get a vote. GRACE mission data is available in near real time for those who worry about Earth tides and millimeters of ocean height! (The units are cm/sec^2, which are now called Gals -- for Galileo.) Dave Finkleman Senior Scientist Center for Space Standards and Innovation Analytical Graphics, Inc. 7150 Campus Drive Colorado Springs, CO 80920 Phone: 719-510-8282 or 719-321-4780 Fax: 719-573-9079 Discover CSSI data downloads, technical webinars, publications, and outreach events at www.CenterForSpace.com. ___ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
Re: [LEAPSECS] LEAPSECS Digest, Vol 51, Issue 24
Addressing all comments at once: 1. I had a similar exchange with Yuri Davydov, then Deputy Director of ROSKOSMOS, the Russian Space Agency. His response to operators not understanding their own operation was, Get smarter operators! He is correct. Some day, when I have been retired from the Air Force a bit longer, I will better qualify that exchange. I retired in 1993. It has not been long enough. 2. Whoever observed that ALL pertinent exchanges between collaborators should be vetted in advance is right on the mark. When time and intellect allow, there should always be well coordinated Interface Control Documents (ICD). The standard message formats are very clearly qualified to be guides for such negotiation. However, they are an expedient for communication among those who do almost never work with each other -- for example, when two satellites that are uncoordinated come too close to each other. If you visit the SOCRATES page on our website (http://www.centerforspace.com) you will see that this happens hundreds of times each day. (It's under Tools.) Dave Finkleman Senior Scientist Center for Space Standards and Innovation Analytical Graphics, Inc. 7150 Campus Drive Colorado Springs, CO 80920 Phone: 719-510-8282 or 719-321-4780 Fax: 719-573-9079 Discover CSSI data downloads, technical webinars, publications, and outreach events at www.CenterForSpace.com. ___ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
[LEAPSECS] Mean ... Orbits
I know that I'm getting in over my head, but the thread is sounding a lot like statistical filtering, orbit determination, and tracking. Filtering is estimation into the future based on mathematically redundant observations subject to minimizing a cost function. Think least squares. (I just know that I am selling ice to the Eskimos.) It is finding the best fit to the observations of a hypothesis with free parameters. Smoothing is going backwards with the same process -- perhaps with an improved hypothesis from filtering. (Think, perhaps, prolepsis.) I am sure that many have applied these principles to estimating the state of the Earth, where the state vector includes things such as nutation and the deceleration of the Earth's rotation. So much for teaching astronomers algebra. Most such estimations are the outcome of series expansions of governing independent variables, dependent variables, or similarity parameters. Think Fourier series -- actually, Jacobi Polynomials, but who is keeping track. Think also of the moments of an assumed statistical distribution. The lowest order (DC component, if you will) is called the mean. In Fourier series, it would be the state averaged over the period of the trigonometric functions. For an assumed Gaussian, it is really the Mean. (If the statistics are Gaussian, the first two moments specify the distribution completely.) Otherwise, that is not really a time averaged mean -- partly because the independent variable isn't always time. In optics expanded in Zernike Polynomials (a complete, orthonormal series over the unit circle), it is called PISTON, translating a lens back and forth. The result in orbit determination is called the mean orbit, but that doesn't imply that it is averaged over time. It is usually the Keplerian, two-body orbit, which is certainly time varying. The second order (linear terms) are called secular, or in optics tilt. The quadratic terms in optics are called focus (the cross product term is -- guess what -- astigmatism.) Now that I've exposed my lack of understanding, the conclusion is that the mean solar second is the outcome of a statistical estimation of governing state variables fitted against observations. Which means that it is really not necessarily an average over time. Now, attack!!! Dave Finkleman Senior Scientist Center for Space Standards and Innovation Analytical Graphics, Inc. 7150 Campus Drive Colorado Springs, CO 80920 Phone: 719-510-8282 or 719-321-4780 Fax: 719-573-9079 Discover CSSI data downloads, technical webinars, publications, and outreach events at www.CenterForSpace.com. ___ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
[LEAPSECS] American Scientist
I have been invited to write an article on this subject for the quarterly journal of Sigma Xi, American Scientist. Someone read our AAS paper and thought the subject would be appropriate for the diverse technical community. The style is that the report be understandable to those with a solid technical background, neither experts nor laymen. I welcome suggestions, and I will share authorship with all willing to work on it. BTW: The Islamic month begins with heliacal rising of the crescent Moon. However, contrary to my warped recollection, the Islamic day cycle is governed by the Sun. However, there is still a difference between the start of the Moslem day (sunset or Maghrib - which means west) and the start of the Hebrew day (verifiable star sightings). Dave Finkleman Senior Scientist Center for Space Standards and Innovation Analytical Graphics, Inc. 7150 Campus Drive Colorado Springs, CO 80920 Phone: 719-510-8282 or 719-321-4780 Fax: 719-573-9079 Discover CSSI data downloads, technical webinars, publications, and outreach events at www.CenterForSpace.com. ___ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
Re: [LEAPSECS] LEAPSECS Digest, Vol 51, Issue 4
As long as there is time, coordinating time with events will be difficult. The level at which things must be synchronized has descended (or ascended) to less than nanoseconds. It is an example of Finkleman's Principle of Conservation of Consternation. Many alternatives discussed in this group are feasible and reasonable, but none is a permanent solution. There is no permanent solution. Enough philosophy. A new time scale for our purposes is a good idea. But, who would realize and distribute it? What changes would using it entail? I think we are stuck with what we've got, but it should be molded to meet need, not convenience. Dave Finkleman Senior Scientist Center for Space Standards and Innovation Analytical Graphics, Inc. 7150 Campus Drive Colorado Springs, CO 80920 Phone: 719-510-8282 or 719-321-4780 Fax: 719-573-9079 Discover CSSI data downloads, technical webinars, publications, and outreach events at www.CenterForSpace.com. ___ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
[LEAPSECS] Meeting with Wayne Whyte
I have convinced Wayne that a face to face meeting would clear the air. I meet with him on Friday. I would appreciate a few examples of specific commercial or system unique software that would be deprecated if leap seconds and their more precise companions were deleted. BTW, the Moslem day begins at observable moon rise, which is different than sunset. Orthodox observers in several religions (Judiasm, Islam, and others) are very concerned about precise definitions of these events and timing of prayer intervals. Dave Finkleman Senior Scientist Center for Space Standards and Innovation Analytical Graphics, Inc. 7150 Campus Drive Colorado Springs, CO 80920 Phone: 719-510-8282 or 719-321-4780 Fax: 719-573-9079 ___ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
[LEAPSECS] A slight digression.
First, two time scales, one civil and one technical, seems like a very good idea. Any correlation between them need not be scientifically precise. There is much literature on countries and religions with two or more calendars, some for ecclesiastical and some for commercial endeavors. Why not? The digression. With verifiable communcation among IAU principals, I requested an addendum to the minutes of the October SG7 meeting, recorded by Dr. Arias. The real tsunami is yet to arrive, but Committee 31, Ian Corbett, and others are on the warpath. They are unwilling to acknowledge in any way the implicit (or explicit depending on your point of view) retraction of IAU endorsement of R460-6. BIPM has invited Ken Seidelmann to write an article in a forthcoming issue of Metrologica. I am sure that he will provide sound alternatives to Bob Nelson's article a few years ago. I will be in Geneva in April, and I have requsted a meeting with ITU principals. The ball is still rolling! With regard to system engineering and the significance of knowing definitively what one needs to accomplish an essential task, I am delivering a paper at the USAF Ground Systems Architecture Workshop in LA in March that addresses this in a manner that reflects the exchanges on this thread. The topic is exchanging data relevant to imminent conjunctions among satellites. The (obvious) fundamental principle is that every element of data and metadata must be directly traceable to the well defined goal. Co-equal, sufficient data and metadata must be inclulded or adequately referenced from widely available sources to allow the user to reproduce or verify the information as his level of confidence requires. I confirm Rob's, Warner's, Poul-Henning's, and others' observations that few even think about what they are trying to accomplish and what they need to accomplish it -- or even if they need to do it at all. df . ___ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
[LEAPSECS] Clarification and VM Synchronization
First, to clarify what I meant by UTC being inaccurate. IMO, UTC is inaccurate as a measure of Earth rotation. It is precise in atomic seconds, but it is inaccurate for astronomical purposes. Accuracy is restored to a significant degree by DUT. It is precise to the degree that contributing clocks can be synchronized (nanosecond level, or as previous discussions conjecture, picosecond level). I am as usual insecure about this, and I would appreciate either confirmation or a more suitable alternative. Second, I am now fascinated by the implications of lack of synch among virtual machines or real networks of distributed computers. I watched the YouTube video recommend in the previous thread. I do not understand this any way near to the others on this group, but I need to convince non-technical authorities that this matters. Any suggestions other than a two by four with lots of momentum -- and maybe a protruding nail? It is ironic that the shift in astrological signs made headlines this morning while the significance of Earth rotation and orientation parameters escapes notice. Dave Finkleman Senior Scientist Center for Space Standards and Innovation Analytical Graphics, Inc. 7150 Campus Drive Colorado Springs, CO 80920 Phone: 719-510-8282 or 719-321-4780 Fax: 719-573-9079 Discover CSSI data downloads, technical webinars, publications, and outreach events at www.CenterForSpace.com. ** ___ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
[LEAPSECS] Accuracy and Precision
These terms have appeared in recent exchanges. Keeping the distinction clear is one of my continuing quests. Perhaps I have it wrong, too. I am sure that someone will let me know. Accuracy is how well a measurement compares to a standard. If my one meter measuring stick is not one meter long, every measurement I make with it will be inaccurate. Precision is the variation among measurements. Even if the measuring stick is absolutely one meter long, every time I make a measurement, I may misplace it a bit. Each realization of the same measurement will be different. In most cases, it is better to be imprecise but accurate than inaccurate but precise. In the former you can be reasonably sure that the correct result is in there somewhere. In the latter you can be absolutely sure that your measurement is wrong. A great simplification, but it works with the layman. Now I will take the leap of applying this to time. (Pun intended.) UTC provides precise time intervals for most practical purposes. However, it is inaccurate as the difference between UTC and time scales based on Earth rotation grows. I know precisely at the end of 86,400 SI seconds, that my perception of where I am in space is wrong. This is why we are members of the Precise Time and Time Interval community -- not the Accurate Time and Time Interval Community, I think. Dave Finkleman Senior Scientist Center for Space Standards and Innovation Analytical Graphics, Inc. 7150 Campus Drive Colorado Springs, CO 80920 Phone: 719-510-8282 or 719-321-4780 Fax: 719-573-9079 Discover CSSI data downloads, technical webinars, publications, and outreach events at www.CenterForSpace.com. ___ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
[LEAPSECS] IAU Support for R460-6
There is no IAU support for the proposal to eliminate the leap second. On the other hand, there is just not consensus one way or the other. However, perceived IAU support was cited at the SG7 meeting in Geneva. That misconception has been corrected, as reported from credible and trustworthy sources. For what it's worth. There seems to be consensus that there are problems. As is painfully obvious, I am a newcomer. Therefore, I ask if there has even been a meeting/working group/etc. to address issues with UTC as opposed to definitions and resolutions about what UTC should or should not be? Dave Finkleman Senior Scientist Center for Space Standards and Innovation Analytical Graphics, Inc. 7150 Campus Drive Colorado Springs, CO 80920 Phone: 719-510-8282 or 719-321-4780 Fax: 719-573-9079 Discover CSSI data downloads, technical webinars, publications, and outreach events at www.CenterForSpace.com. ___ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
[LEAPSECS] Who do we develop standards for?
Recent postings illustrate that leap seconds don't matter to most people. It has also been pointed out that those for or against the leap second are a countable few. However, if it doesn't matter to most, then it shouldn't matter if leap seconds (by some definition) remain. There are almost always procedural work-arounds such as resynching periodically. I have learned in my ISO work that we develop standards for those to whom the issue matters -- not for those who are unaffected or have no stake. In our AIAA paper we enumerate the criteria for a standard. Working groups are appointed to develop specific standards. Each member must be a recognized expert. Each must have a material stake in the outcome. Membership must be balanced among industry, academia/research, and government at least to the extent that no single group can dominate. Finally, a minimum number of positive votes is required even if there are few votes. Three positive and two abstentions among five involved member bodies is not sufficient. Five positive votes are required minimum. Five out of eight works, four out of seven doesn't. Our paper demonstrates that the ITU-R process fulfills virtually none of the internationally accepted criteria for a standard. If it is a fact that the preponderance of humanity doesn't care one way or the other, standards are desireable for the countable few who do care, who must exchange precise and accurate data, and on whom the preponderance of humanity relies without realizing it. IMO when the misphasing of civil time and solar time becomes really noticeable is not the issue. The issue is precise synchronization that is as effective as we can make it (not perfect) and as enduring as necessary within the evolution of technology as we see it. IMO, the current scheme does not meet those criteria. Proposals to deprecate the leap second have no substance for judging effectiveness or suitability. Dave Finkleman ___ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
[LEAPSECS] Bob Nelson
Dave Finkleman Senior Scientist Center for Space Standards and Innovation Analytical Graphics, Inc. 7150 Campus Drive Colorado Springs, CO 80920 Phone: 719-510-8282 or 719-321-4780 Fax: 719-573-9079 Discover CSSI data downloads, technical webinars, publications, and outreach events at www.CenterForSpace.com. -Original Message- He has communicated with OSD and my employer castigating my campaign for consensus that considers the consequences. His communication is all emotion and no substance. He conjectures great damage to national security and inevitable disaster if the leap second is retained. He includes Wayne Hanson, Wayne White, and Ron Beard in his thrust to kill difference of opinion. He claims that only a countable few disagree with the recommendation. He cites Steve Allen, John Seago, and Ken Seidelmann among the countable few. I hesitate to accuse Bob of slander, but draw your own conclusions. What course of action would the group recommend? Abandon the crusade to save myself? Dave Finkleman ___ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
[LEAPSECS] Leap seconds, precision time, and technical progress
This old newcomer learns much from these exchanges. I offer the following observation. Technology advances to exploit our ability to realize and measure time precisely increases. Use of spectrum with frequency, time, and code division multiplexing is an example. I realize that the time scale of such applications need not have a uniform epoch in the distant past or be tied to astronomical phenomena. Perhaps you can think of better examples that do. Therefore, it is broadly important that precise time accrual be synchronized and coordinated. Astronomical phenomena are the most fundamental vehicles for synchronization. They belong to no one. No one can control them. A thought during an introspective interlude. Dave Finkleman Senior Scientist Center for Space Standards and Innovation Analytical Graphics, Inc. 7150 Campus Drive Colorado Springs, CO 80920 Phone: 719-510-8282 or 719-321-4780 Fax: 719-573-9079 Discover CSSI data downloads, technical webinars, publications, and outreach events at www.CenterForSpace.com. ___ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
[LEAPSECS] DCF 77
Do any sources of precise, accrued time have a leap second warning bit as DCF 77 does?Is the philosophy of leap second warning in DCF 77 a good paradigm for helping implement the leap second broadly? Dave Finkleman Senior Scientist Center for Space Standards and Innovation Analytical Graphics, Inc. 7150 Campus Drive Colorado Springs, CO 80920 Phone: 719-510-8282 or 719-321-4780 Fax: 719-573-9079 Discover CSSI data downloads, technical webinars, publications, and outreach events at www.CenterForSpace.com. ___ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
Re: [LEAPSECS] LEAPSECS Digest, Vol 48, Issue 15
First, I apologize for my zealous haste in building my case. The motion of satellites in milliseconds is just meters, as has been noted. With undiminished zeal, I note that comparisons among orbit determination techniques try to be precise to meters and that some notable forces, such as Earth tides, are meter-scale effects. So, I think my general theme still holds. Sorry. With respect to ISO, it is not the only international standards body. Often industrial and national authorities find ISO standards too generic, offering little specific guidance. This is sometimes true. In the US, AIAA standards provide the next level of specificity and are promoted to international status through ISO when they are mature. This is where the German DIN, UK BSI, and other national standards organizations take over. (BTW, the national organizations are the foundational ISO members.) Some, such as Japan, do insist on the letter of ISO standards. We accommodate this as best we can with the advice of Japanese stakeholders to eliminate overly restrictive clauses. Hopefully, what comes out is feasible if the government mandates it. Some, as in the EU, form their own standards bodies that develop standards where none exist and in most cases try to promote them through ISO. The EU body is the European Cooperation for Space Standardization (ECSS). ECSS examines ISO space related standards and often adopts them as ECSS standards. ISO has great influence, but it does not and should not mandate anything. Normative means the consensus way to do things so that diverse users and providers can work together. It does not imply a mandate. My view from the inside. As best I can determine, there are not even normative processes for UTC. Dave Finkleman Senior Scientist Center for Space Standards and Innovation Analytical Graphics, Inc. 7150 Campus Drive Colorado Springs, CO 80920 Phone: 719-510-8282 or 719-321-4780 Fax: 719-573-9079 Discover CSSI data downloads, technical webinars, publications, and outreach events at www.CenterForSpace.com. ___ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
Re: [LEAPSECS] LEAPSECS Digest, Vol 48, Issue 13
I learn something with every exchange. Thanks. This is what is in ISO 31-1, which is now ISO 8-3 time, time interval durationt second s The second is the duration of 9 192 631 770 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the caesium-133 atom Representations of time of day are defined in ISO 8601. minute min 1 min = 60 s hour h 1 h = 60 min = 3 600 s day d 1 d = 24 h = 86 400 s Other ISO standards, for example, Maritime Navigation, define the second as 1/60th of a minute or 1/86,400 of a day, where a day is from sunrise to sunrise, a solar day, or from a star passing the local meridian to its return, a sidereal day. There is ambiguity among ISO standards and probably those of other organizations. As space operations grow more complex and the degree of understanding of operators declines (some corollary of the Peter Principle), the opportunity for confusion grows as precision in milliseconds or less becomes more important. A millisecond in Low Earth Orbit is a few kilometers, and some satellites are regularly in closer conjunction than that. Please let me know if this argument seems specious. My involvement manifests the confusion I have seen and experienced in astrodynamics. It is true that education in that discipline exposes students to these matters, but in one ear and out the other. It is not as important for them to remember as are the fundamentals of orbital mechanics. I think we need more widely vetted and easily accessible normative definitions of the different kinds of seconds and time scales as well as guidance (at least for satellite operators with little background) in which to use for a given application and how to use them. I once had a similar exchange with Yuri Davidov, Deputy Head of Roskosmos. He said that we should get smarter operators. Perhaps I am too much into this and not enough educated. I will not be offended if you opine that my perceptions are incorrect. Dave Finkleman Senior Scientist Center for Space Standards and Innovation Analytical Graphics, Inc. 7150 Campus Drive Colorado Springs, CO 80920 Phone: 719-510-8282 or 719-321-4780 Fax: 719-573-9079 Discover CSSI data downloads, technical webinars, publications, and outreach events at www.CenterForSpace.com. -Original Message- 8601 is a problem. If you mean their explanations of time scale, time point, time axis etc -- well, these are indeed arcane, but they are just taken from IEC 60 050. (Nowadays, ISO/IEC 80 000 is the international standard for terminology regarding physical quantites. And the IAU regulate their own astronomical time scales, of course.) Michael Deckers. * ___ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
Re: [LEAPSECS] LEAPSECS Digest, Vol 48, Issue 12
Many of your comments are addressed in AIAA-2010-8391, which Ken, John, and I wrote for the Toronto AAS conference last August. It is available online, or interested parties can write me personally, and I will provide copies. AGI did not relinquish complete copy rights to AIAA or AAS. ISO 8601 is a problem. So far I have not heard anything from ISO TC12, which is responsible. But I am diligent. I will extract something from them. Their treatment of time is deficient and inconsistent. I don't know how this was coordinated either. Most of their treatment of time is just vetting almost every possible way of expressing the digits. I really like Duncan Steel's book, Marking Time. It may not meet the standards of time professionals, but it is readable and understandable. Dennis and Ken provide a wealth of well referenced material as well. There are, of course, many time scales. Our paper discusses this briefly. Which one uses depends on the application. In my experience, astrodynamics is the same. Different force models, solution techniques, and computational implementations. Some better for some applications than others. None universally suitable for everything. In that discipline, we (CSSI) feel it important that one understand the differences among the techniques so that different outcomes can be explained and the best technique chosen by the user for his needs. We strongly believe that there should not be a universally mandated approach. The same for time scales, I think. ISO is not a governmental organization. It does not enforce and it cannot mandate any of its standards. The standards are developed voluntarily by experts WITH A STAKE IN THE OUTCOME and who represent balance among industry, research, academia, and government. ISO standards are not recommendations. They are normative consensus. In that regard, ITU has no normative or legal authority. In fact, what credibility ITU has in standards resides in ITU-T, not ITU-R! BIPM, CIPM, etc. are pivotal. They participate in JTCTG-1, which I mentioned briefly. I won't go into what JTCG-1 is in email, but it is the evolved metrology community, composed of literally dozens of stakeholder organizations. Enough for the moment. Dave Finkleman Senior Scientist Center for Space Standards and Innovation Analytical Graphics, Inc. 7150 Campus Drive Colorado Springs, CO 80920 Phone: 719-510-8282 or 719-321-4780 Fax: 719-573-9079 Discover CSSI data downloads, technical webinars, publications, and outreach events at www.CenterForSpace.com. ___ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
[LEAPSECS] A consolidated approach.
I wisely avoided contributing the last few days' debate. Ken Seidelmann, John Seago, and I have been working to overcome the deficiencies in the process used to formulate the new ITU-R recommendation. As we said in our paper last summer, the goals are to assure that major stakeholders are included in consensus, to develop normative guidance for accommodating leap seconds should they be retained or work without them if they are deprecated, and to define in a normative sense the different flavors of seconds, minutes, weeks, etc. The guidance should include how to handle DUT greater than 0.9 seconds and what the reasonable predictive time span should be for inserting leap seconds. These I have gleaned from your exchanges are your major concerns and ideas. How are we pursuing this? We are using my authority within ISO. Several ISO technical committees are affected: ISO/TC154 (Processes, data elements and documents in commerce, industry and administration, ISO/TC12 Units and Measurement, and ISO TC37 Terminology as well as JTC-1.The terminology folks are already working on whether a time scale unconnected with astronomical events should include the term universal. I bring this to your attention to solicit your participation in resolving this long-standing issue. There will be meetings in various places, most often in Geneva. Changing the subject, the comments on geodetic references are very relevant. There is nothing like the leap second issue, but WGS-84 is not used world-wide. There are discrepancies in maps of Korea, for instance. WGS-84 is also out of date relative to the continuing examination of the geopotential such as the GRACE mission. As you all know, Earth orientation and time are not independent. Correlating EOP with real time observations in order to infer current orbits precisely enough for assessing conjunctions among satellite is very important. Dave Finkleman Senior Scientist Center for Space Standards and Innovation Analytical Graphics, Inc. 7150 Campus Drive Colorado Springs, CO 80920 Phone: 719-510-8282 or 719-321-4780 Fax: 719-573-9079 Discover CSSI data downloads, technical webinars, publications, and outreach events at www.CenterForSpace.com. ___ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
[LEAPSECS] Leap Sec vs Y2K
Ken Seidelmann, John Seago, and I addressed this in our papers and in the recent editorial in Space News. The Y2K effort was necessary. Everyone knew that we could not just watch what might happen and catch up afterwards. In the case of leap seconds, no one knows what the real consequences might be if we changed, and change is not necessary as it was for years that stopped at 99. We can just let things be as they have been for nearly 40 years. Dave Finkleman Senior Scientist Center for Space Standards and Innovation Analytical Graphics, Inc. 7150 Campus Drive Colorado Springs, CO 80920 Phone: 719-510-8282 or 719-321-4780 Fax: 719-573-9079 Discover CSSI data downloads, technical webinars, publications, and outreach events at www.CenterForSpace.com. -Original Message- From: leapsecs-boun...@leapsecond.com [mailto:leapsecs-boun...@leapsecond.com] On Behalf Of leapsecs-requ...@leapsecond.com Sent: Friday, December 10, 2010 10:01 AM To: leapsecs@leapsecond.com Subject: LEAPSECS Digest, Vol 48, Issue 2 Send LEAPSECS mailing list submissions to leapsecs@leapsecond.com To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to leapsecs-requ...@leapsecond.com You can reach the person managing the list at leapsecs-ow...@leapsecond.com When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than Re: Contents of LEAPSECS digest... Today's Topics: 1. Re: php breaks if UTC has no leap seconds? (p...@2038bug.com) 2. Re: php breaks if UTC has no leap seconds? (Richard B. Langley) 3. Re: php breaks if UTC has no leap seconds? (Paul Sheer) -- Message: 1 Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2010 16:21:43 + From: p...@2038bug.com Subject: Re: [LEAPSECS] php breaks if UTC has no leap seconds? To: Leap Second Discussion List leapsecs@leapsecond.com Message-ID: 1970411972-1291998043-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-11035931 7...@bda950.bisx.prod.on.blackberry Content-Type: text/plain; charset=Windows-1252 WH-WH-Wht Contractors spent millions of hours wading through hundreds of millions of lines of code adding missing century digits. Thousands of Cobal programmers lost there jobs after Y2K. Every organisation that managed any kind of computer system had to do testing to verify that the systems would work through Y2K and replace them otherwise. My company managed such a system. Were you living under a rock then -paul Sent from my BlackBerry? by Boost Mobile -Original Message- From: Gerard Ashton ashto...@comcast.net Sender: leapsecs-boun...@leapsecond.com Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2010 11:03:10 To: Leap Second Discussion Listleapsecs@leapsecond.com Reply-To: Leap Second Discussion List leapsecs@leapsecond.com Subject: Re: [LEAPSECS] php breaks if UTC has no leap seconds? On 12/10/2010 10:15 AM, Peter Vince wrote: Hello Paul, I'd be interested if you have some examples of of Y2K bugs that were fixed before they became a problem. In my very limited experience, I wasn't affected by any, nor aware of them. Peter On 10 December 2010 01:55, Paul Sheerp...@2038bug.com wrote: Everybody said y2k was going to break everything. In the end, it was a non-event :) It was a non-event BECAUSE the industry spent enormous $$ to fix all the zillions of Y2K bugs in time. It was still a disaster from an expendature point of view. (Does anyone need to even explain this) -paul ___ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs I worked for IBM at the time. Many older personal computers in use by staff were discarded because it would have been too difficult to teach all the staff the special tricks to keep them limping along when 2000 arrived. Gerry Ashton ___ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs -- Message: 2 Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2010 12:18:58 -0400 From: Richard B. Langley l...@unb.ca Subject: Re: [LEAPSECS] php breaks if UTC has no leap seconds? To: leapsecs@leapsecond.com Message-ID: 20101210121858.20027gdb2wlwb...@webmail.unb.ca Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; DelSp=Yes; format=flowed USNO predicts UT1-UTC. In Bulletin A http://maia.usno.navy.mil/ser7/ser7.dat, they predict daily values for a year in advance but only provide an error estimate up to 40 days in advance. Elsewhere http://maia.usno.navy.mil/ser7/deltat.preds, longer-term predictions are given; supposedly updated annually. -- Richard Langley Quoting Warner Losh i...@bsdimp.com: On 12/09/2010 17:35, Rob Seaman wrote: On Dec 9, 2010, at 3:53 PM, Steve Allen wrote: This is the first
[LEAPSECS] Back to Basics
Recalibrating to get to the point. 1. Universal Time is a set of time scales related to the mean diurnal motion of the Sun.So defined in many places and first recommended by the IAU in 1935. Different flavors have been defined and redefined since, but the connection with motion of the Sun is consistent and essential. The IAU is the enduring authority. So, it is not a matter of the convenience of one sector relative to the other or any religious, psychological, or biological matter. It is a matter of definition. Anything Universal by definition must be related to the mean motion of the Sun. 2. UTC is an international time scale approximating Greenwich mean solar time with the precision of the SI second and matching UT1 to within one second. (From Seidelmann with supporting references.) It was precipitated by adoption of the SI second based on the properties of Cesium 133. 3. The ITU is constituted under the UN as a regulatory agency without the force of law. The relationship with ISO is collaborative, but ITU recommendations do not carry the force of international standards unless implemented by ISO under ISO rules and procedures. ITU-R 460-x are not normative international standards. A normative standard can be referenced in contracts as a binding requirement. Furthermore, the ITU relationship is through ITU-T, not ITU-R. These are the basis of our discussions. My goal is not necessarily to save the leap second. It is to assure consistent definition and implementation of time intervals and time scales for a broad range of applications. UTC was conceived and implemented to correlate with Earth rotation to a degree sufficient for many processes time accrued in constant atomic seconds. Without leap seconds, it is no longer UTC. We require guidance in implementing for different purposes different degrees of correlation with Earth rotation -- and mechanisms for providing timely information that is precise enough for each element of that spectrum. Dave Finkleman Senior Scientist Center for Space Standards and Innovation Analytical Graphics, Inc. 7150 Campus Drive Colorado Springs, CO 80920 Phone: 719-510-8282 or 719-321-4780 Fax: 719-573-9079 Discover CSSI data downloads, technical webinars, publications, and outreach events at www.CenterForSpace.com. *** ___ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
Re: [LEAPSECS] LEAPSECS Digest, Vol 47, Issue 12 - Clarification
The term normative has special meaning. From Wikipedia: In law, as an academic discipline, the term normative is used to describe the way something ought to be done according to a value position. A normative document (such as an ISO Standard) has greater credibility, if not authority, than any other reference in a contract or law. It has been developed through an audited, collaborative consensus. It is created voluntarily to meet a demonstrated need. It is specific and expressed the same way in all instances. Since there is no normative definition of UTC, every instance in a contract, law, or similar vehicle should be accompanied by the definition intended. This is a major flaw of the US law of 2007 that mandated UTC as the civil time scale in the US. It did not say what UTC was, is, or will be, so it could be anything as long as DoC and USNO agree. Dave Finkleman Senior Scientist Center for Space Standards and Innovation Analytical Graphics, Inc. 7150 Campus Drive Colorado Springs, CO 80920 Phone: 719-510-8282 or 719-321-4780 Fax: 719-573-9079 Discover CSSI data downloads, technical webinars, publications, and outreach events at www.CenterForSpace.com. ___ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
[LEAPSECS] Degrees of Accommodating Time Based on Earth Rotation
A long flight was time to really read Ken Seidelmann's book and part of Woolard and Clemence, Spherical Astronomy. Subsequent exchanges with Ken give me a new understanding. (Probably an old understanding for the rest of you.) When we solve equations approximating physical processes, we are really defining our own dynamical time scale. Even with well characterized initial conditions or observations and a well founded system of units, the clock in our analysis does not tick at the same rate as those based on real phenomena. We must correlate time as perceived in our analyses with the temporal relationships among objects in the universe. For Earth rotation, time zones are the most coarse correlation. For time measured in SI seconds, not related to external phenomena, leap seconds are the next most precise. Finally, DUT, is precise enough for most astronomical and astrodynamic applications. It is a hierarchy each level of which is sufficient for a range of applications. Every time we solve dynamical equations, we are defining a unique time scale and time interval based on things such as analytical discretization and computational architecture. Comments? Dave Finkleman Senior Scientist Center for Space Standards and Innovation Analytical Graphics, Inc. 7150 Campus Drive Colorado Springs, CO 80920 Phone: 719-510-8282 or 719-321-4780 Fax: 719-573-9079 Discover CSSI data downloads, technical webinars, publications, and outreach events at www.CenterForSpace.com. ** ___ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
[LEAPSECS] The good fight.
I hope I haven't screwed up the response protocol again. We are trying to do what several have suggested, prepare for what might be inevitable. Naming ambiguity is a central issue. I have sent Rob a concept paper to be presented to ISO this week. It suggests collaboration among ITU-R, JCGM, IAU, ISO, and a couple of other stakeholder bodies to consider hopefully more objectively the actions necessary one way or the other. Perhaps Rob can figure out some way to distribute it without constipating the exchanges. Dave Finkleman Senior Scientist Center for Space Standards and Innovation Analytical Graphics, Inc. 7150 Campus Drive Colorado Springs, CO 80920 Phone: 719-510-8282 or 719-321-4780 Fax: 719-573-9079 Discover CSSI data downloads, technical webinars, publications, and outreach events at www.CenterForSpace.com. ___ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
Re: [LEAPSECS] LEAPSECS Digest, Vol 45, Issue 30
The sundial community is in the game. I think Precision Sundials, LLC, is playing. They have sundials with latitude! The points that Rob and others make about the cost of a change were included in the editorial that Space News promised to publish. Dave Finkleman Senior Scientist Center for Space Standards and Innovation Analytical Graphics, Inc. 7150 Campus Drive Colorado Springs, CO 80920 Phone: 719-510-8282 or 719-321-4780 Fax: 719-573-9079 Discover CSSI data downloads, technical webinars, publications, and outreach events at www.CenterForSpace.com. -Original Message- From: leapsecs-boun...@leapsecond.com [mailto:leapsecs-boun...@leapsecond.com] On Behalf Of leapsecs-requ...@leapsecond.com Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2010 10:01 AM To: leapsecs@leapsecond.com Subject: LEAPSECS Digest, Vol 45, Issue 30 Send LEAPSECS mailing list submissions to leapsecs@leapsecond.com To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to leapsecs-requ...@leapsecond.com You can reach the person managing the list at leapsecs-ow...@leapsecond.com When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than Re: Contents of LEAPSECS digest... Today's Topics: 1. Re: LEAPSECS Digest, Vol 45, Issue 29 (Finkleman, Dave) -- Message: 1 Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2010 12:18:56 -0400 From: Finkleman, Dave dfinkle...@agi.com Subject: Re: [LEAPSECS] LEAPSECS Digest, Vol 45, Issue 29 To: leapsecs@leapsecond.com Message-ID: 3b33e89c51d2de44be2f0c757c656c880963b...@mail02.stk.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII I've been traveling and unable to respond to postings. Sorry. I submitted exhaustive comments to the Wayne's. I just codified what I said during the 16 Aug open conference call. Surprisingly, they considered them all and even incorporated some. Perhaps this is a small step forward. I played my ISO TC20/SC14 card. Space News also promised to published very soon an editorial, Time is money that Ken Seidelmann, John Seago, and I wrote. I doubt that attaching it to this email would work, but I will send it to those who would like a copy. We stressed for that community the unknown costs and the confusion if the name were not changed. Dave Finkleman Senior Scientist Center for Space Standards and Innovation Analytical Graphics, Inc. 7150 Campus Drive Colorado Springs, CO 80920 Phone: 719-510-8282 or 719-321-4780 Fax: 719-573-9079 Discover CSSI data downloads, technical webinars, publications, and outreach events at www.CenterForSpace.com. -Original Message- From: leapsecs-boun...@leapsecond.com [mailto:leapsecs-boun...@leapsecond.com] On Behalf Of leapsecs-requ...@leapsecond.com Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2010 10:01 AM To: leapsecs@leapsecond.com Subject: LEAPSECS Digest, Vol 45, Issue 29 Send LEAPSECS mailing list submissions to leapsecs@leapsecond.com To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to leapsecs-requ...@leapsecond.com You can reach the person managing the list at leapsecs-ow...@leapsecond.com When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than Re: Contents of LEAPSECS digest... Today's Topics: 1. Re: comments on DRR TF.460-6 (Michael Sokolov) 2. Re: comments on DRR TF.460-6 (M. Warner Losh) 3. Re: comments on DRR TF.460-6 (Steve Allen) 4. Re: comments on DRR TF.460-6 (Poul-Henning Kamp) 5. Re: comments on DRR TF.460-6 (Robert Seaman) 6. Re: comments on DRR TF.460-6 (Paul Sheer) -- Message: 1 Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2010 15:42:57 GMT From: msoko...@ivan.harhan.org (Michael Sokolov) Subject: Re: [LEAPSECS] comments on DRR TF.460-6 To: leapsecs@leapsecond.com Message-ID: 1009211542.aa10...@ivan.harhan.org Tony Finch d...@dotat.at wrote: Are there any requirements for mean solar time other than astronomy and celectial navigation? Yes: religion, philosophy and moral justice. MS -- Message: 2 Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2010 11:15:21 -0600 (MDT) From: M. Warner Losh i...@bsdimp.com Subject: Re: [LEAPSECS] comments on DRR TF.460-6 To: leapsecs@leapsecond.com, msoko...@ivan.harhan.org Message-ID: 20100921.111521.460114267356660938@bsdimp.com Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii In message: 1009211542.aa10...@ivan.harhan.org msoko...@ivan.harhan.org (Michael Sokolov) writes: : Tony Finch d...@dotat.at wrote: : : Are there any requirements for mean solar time other than astronomy and : celectial navigation? : : Yes: religion, philosophy and moral justice. I get the first two. Leap seconds must die, a phrase I've used
Re: [LEAPSECS] LEAPSECS Digest, Vol 45, Issue 11
Does someone capture and archive these amazing discussions? Pardon silly questions from a newcomer. This kind of knowledgeable exchange is what the ITU is missing. There are sound technical reasons for retaining or dispensing with the leap second. They need to be exposed, and the proponent of each should consider what others would have to do in order to accommodate an alternative. This discussion thread does that but only to a small audience of geeks. To reveal my bias, if the situation is this arguable, why change anything? We conjecture that whatever the cost or inconvenience of living with the leap second, the costs and difficulties of deprecating the leap second might be greater. It is most a matter of who pays the bill. Dave Finkleman Senior Scientist Center for Space Standards and Innovation Analytical Graphics, Inc. 7150 Campus Drive Colorado Springs, CO 80920 Phone: 719-510-8282 or 719-321-4780 Fax: 719-573-9079 Discover CSSI data downloads, technical webinars, publications, and outreach events at www.CenterForSpace.com. -Original Message- From: leapsecs-boun...@leapsecond.com [mailto:leapsecs-boun...@leapsecond.com] On Behalf Of leapsecs-requ...@leapsecond.com Sent: Friday, September 03, 2010 1:01 PM To: leapsecs@leapsecond.com Subject: LEAPSECS Digest, Vol 45, Issue 11 Send LEAPSECS mailing list submissions to leapsecs@leapsecond.com To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to leapsecs-requ...@leapsecond.com You can reach the person managing the list at leapsecs-ow...@leapsecond.com When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than Re: Contents of LEAPSECS digest... Today's Topics: 1. Re: h2g2 (Nero Imhard) 2. Re: LEAPSECS Digest, Vol 45, Issue 1 (Tony Finch) 3. Re: LEAPSECS Digest, Vol 45, Issue 1 (Tony Finch) 4. Re: h2g2 (M. Warner Losh) 5. Re: h2g2 (Michael Sokolov) 6. Re: h2g2 (Ian Batten) 7. Re: LEAPSECS Digest, Vol 45, Issue 1 (Poul-Henning Kamp) 8. Re: h2g2 (Paul Sheer) -- Message: 1 Date: Fri, 3 Sep 2010 19:37:37 +0200 From: Nero Imhard n...@pipe.nl Subject: Re: [LEAPSECS] h2g2 To: Leap Second Discussion List leapsecs@leapsecond.com Message-ID: 67efec27-33c2-4d35-a48f-f7be2ed7d...@pipe.nl Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On 2010-09-03, at 15:56, p...@2038bug.com wrote: on the SAME time. Nobody cares here that solar time and civil time are 43 minutes off. *I* care Warner seems to be missing (or ignoring?) the point. The difference doesn't matter, the fact that the difference is constant does. N -- Message: 2 Date: Fri, 3 Sep 2010 18:49:29 +0100 From: Tony Finch d...@dotat.at Subject: Re: [LEAPSECS] LEAPSECS Digest, Vol 45, Issue 1 To: Leap Second Discussion List leapsecs@leapsecond.com Message-ID: alpine.lsu.2.00.1009031840050.31...@hermes-1.csi.cam.ac.uk Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Fri, 3 Sep 2010, Rob Seaman wrote: On Sep 3, 2010, at 2:18 AM, Tony Finch wrote: If you are syncing to what is now called GMT you are syncing to UTC because they are now in practice exact synonyms. And this is precisely what the ITU is planning to break. I'm not sure that's true. The only de jure definition of GMT is civil time in the UK in winter. The British government and its agencies currently implement GMT as equivalent to UTC. If the ITU change the definition of GMT, and if the British government continues to follow ITU recommendations and to disregard the historical astronomical meaning of GMT, then the equivalence will continue. Tony. -- f.anthony.n.finch d...@dotat.at http://dotat.at/ HUMBER THAMES DOVER WIGHT PORTLAND: NORTH BACKING WEST OR NORTHWEST, 5 TO 7, DECREASING 4 OR 5, OCCASIONALLY 6 LATER IN HUMBER AND THAMES. MODERATE OR ROUGH. RAIN THEN FAIR. GOOD. -- Message: 3 Date: Fri, 3 Sep 2010 19:06:34 +0100 From: Tony Finch d...@dotat.at Subject: Re: [LEAPSECS] LEAPSECS Digest, Vol 45, Issue 1 To: Leap Second Discussion List leapsecs@leapsecond.com Message-ID: alpine.lsu.2.00.1009031853220.31...@hermes-1.csi.cam.ac.uk Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Fri, 3 Sep 2010, Zefram wrote: Tony Finch wrote: As we have seen there are a lot of intricate details whose necessity people can legitimately disagree about and no way to determine an official consensus. Which is why I say that astronomical GMT doesn't exist. Interesting argument. I disagree with your central point: I don't think an official realisation of GMT is required in order for GMT to meaningfully exist. Note that in the above I'm talking about astronomical GMT. There is an official realisation of legal GMT, and it is UTC. If you create a new astronomical
Re: [LEAPSECS] LEAPSECS Digest, Vol 45, Issue 3
I believe that no one is advocating UT1 for civil time scales. I have discovered that UTC is the statutory time scale for the United States but without qualification. In other words, if UTC changes and is still called UTC, the new definition would be the statutory requirement. Every process and system developed for the previous definition would be illegal. Conversely, it UTC were changed but given a different name, the statutes would be of no effect. We would either need a new law or there would be no legally established civil time scale. The law does state that the change has to be agreed to by the Department of Commerce and the USNO. Even if the ITU changes UTC, it is still possible that designated US authorities could choose to remain with the old UTC. This is a very complex legal, sociological, and religious matter. Perhaps a technical matter as well, but the other aspects may be more important. Dave Finkleman Senior Scientist Center for Space Standards and Innovation Analytical Graphics, Inc. 7150 Campus Drive Colorado Springs, CO 80920 Phone: 719-510-8282 or 719-321-4780 Fax: 719-573-9079 Discover CSSI data downloads, technical webinars, publications, and outreach events at www.CenterForSpace.com. -Original Message- From: leapsecs-boun...@leapsecond.com [mailto:leapsecs-boun...@leapsecond.com] On Behalf Of leapsecs-requ...@leapsecond.com Sent: Thursday, September 02, 2010 1:29 PM To: leapsecs@leapsecond.com Subject: LEAPSECS Digest, Vol 45, Issue 3 Send LEAPSECS mailing list submissions to leapsecs@leapsecond.com To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to leapsecs-requ...@leapsecond.com You can reach the person managing the list at leapsecs-ow...@leapsecond.com When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than Re: Contents of LEAPSECS digest... Today's Topics: 1. Re: LEAPSECS Digest, Vol 45, Issue 1 (M. Warner Losh) 2. Re: LEAPSECS Digest, Vol 45, Issue 1 (Richard Langley) 3. Re: LEAPSECS Digest, Vol 45, Issue 1 (Poul-Henning Kamp) 4. Re: LEAPSECS Digest, Vol 45, Issue 1 (Rob Seaman) 5. Re: LEAPSECS Digest, Vol 45, Issue 1 (Poul-Henning Kamp) 6. Re: LEAPSECS Digest, Vol 45, Issue 1 (Rob Seaman) 7. Re: LEAPSECS Digest, Vol 45, Issue 1 (Ian Batten) 8. Re: LEAPSECS Digest, Vol 45, Issue 1 (Poul-Henning Kamp) -- Message: 1 Date: Thu, 02 Sep 2010 12:49:24 -0600 (MDT) From: M. Warner Losh i...@bsdimp.com Subject: Re: [LEAPSECS] LEAPSECS Digest, Vol 45, Issue 1 To: leapsecs@leapsecond.com, s...@ucolick.org Message-ID: 20100902.124924.244264502706473427@bsdimp.com Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii In message: 20100902183636.gb13...@ucolick.org Steve Allen s...@ucolick.org writes: : On Thu 2010-09-02T19:26:03 +0100, Ian Batten hath writ: : It would be interesting to produce a list of countries where legal : time is not UTC, to see what the divide would look like. Wikipedia : claims Belgium, Canada and Eire: for extra fun, I bet most consumers : of time signals in Belgium use DCF77 or TDF, which are clearly in UTC : land, rather than MSF. : : IANL, but based on a few documents I've seen : : Canadian standard time is provincial, not federal. : Quebec adopted UTC on 2007-01-01, and the others have not. : : Venezuela standard time is based on the Greenwich meridian, : whatever that means ... : : If that issue were pressed to the courts it would be very interesting : to see the results of the cases in each country especially in the : light of the shifts of the longitude origin during the last 60 years, : the first 3 of which are here : http://www.ucolick.org/~sla/leapsecs/BIHAR1968.JPG I'd wager that UTC, whatever its realization, would likely trump any locally written laws. After all, UTC has been a widely accepted approximation of the local laws that's attained the force of law through repetitive use (how many real-time realizations of UT1 are propagated, in comparison to UTC). So underlying technical changes to UTC may not change that. It would take a long, and complicated, legal argument to show that UT1 is what should be used (even though nobody knows what it is, day to day). Given the current miss-mash of legal rulings around software, I'd guess that this wouldn't be a clear cut ruling that people in this group have suggested. Warner -- Message: 2 Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2010 15:42:31 -0300 From: Richard Langley l...@unb.ca Subject: Re: [LEAPSECS] LEAPSECS Digest, Vol 45, Issue 1 To: Leap Second Discussion List leapsecs@leapsecond.com Message-ID: c5cf7eae-4213-4498-833c-895a0a73e...@unb.ca Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Can't speak for the other Canadian provinces and territories, but the official
