Re: [LEAPSECS] article for Metrologia

[Michael Wouters]

Hello Demetrios

It’s Open Access, since the intent is to have it widely read.Similarly,
upcoming papers on the proposed redefinition of the second will also be
Open Access.

Cheers
Michael


On Sat, 29 Oct 2022 at 1:56 pm, Demetrios Matsakis via LEAPSECS <
leapsecs@leapsecond.com> wrote:

> I agree with these comments, but I think the paper isn’t out yet and fear
> it will be behind the Metrologia paywall when it does come out.  But that’s
> ok because I see Judah Levine of NIST is a coauthor.  That’s good.  I like
> to say that everyone should have a NIST coauthor because their papers are
> not subject to copyright plus they get placed on their web site. (Of
> course, there are other reasons too.)
>
> You might be interested in this presentation I gave at the CGSIC last
> month, entitled “Will we have a negative leap second”:
> https://www.gps.gov/cgsic/meetings/2022/matsakis.pdf
>
> > On Oct 28, 2022, at 7:15 PM, jimlux  wrote:
> >
> > On 10/28/22 11:10 AM, Steffen Nurpmeso wrote:
> >> Steve Allen wrote in
> >>  <20221028045813.ga20...@ucolick.org>:
> >>  |On Thu 2022-10-27T19:25:01-0700 Steve Allen hath writ:
> >>  |> Levine, Tavella, and Milton have an upcoming article for Metrologia
> >>  |> on the issue of leap seconds in UTC
> >>  |>
> >>  |> https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1681-7575/ac9da5b
> >>  |
> >>  |sorry, stray character appended to my cut and paste
> >>  |
> >>  |https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1681-7575/ac9da5
> >> That "increasing number of applications" all through the document
> >> makes me angry really.  I find it astonishing to read that there
> >> are digital clocks that cannot display a second 60 and all that.
> >
> > The digital clock by my bedside, and a variety or other clocks that
> don't have computers in them don't display second 60, nor do they handle
> going from 58 to 00.
> >
> > The clocks in my various and sundry appliances also do not do this.
> >
> > One can argue, who cares - whether the oven turns on a second early or
> late probably isn't a problem.
> >
> > But what about the enormous number of industrial process controllers -
> almost all of which do not deal with leap seconds.  At some point, sure,
> they'll sync, either by hand, or over the network.  And that's where it
> starts to get sticky.
> >
> > Do you smear or jump? If you're running a system where seconds count -
> radar is one example.  A plane moves several hundred meters/second. If
> you're tracking and sending position reports, do you transmit times in UTC
> or TAI?
> >
> > There's the possibility of cooperative traffic avoidance for cars,
> planes, and boats - The data is always late, so there's an element of
> modeling taking position and velocity at time t=x-Nseconds and propagating
> that forward to t=x.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >> This is just another outcome of the trivialization and
> >> superficialication all around.  You need a reliable source of
> >> time, use TAI; or distribute the offset of UT1 and UTC
> >> permanently, best TAI, too.  so that changes can be detected.  NTP
> >> does still not do it, does it.  (It is still not using DTLS but
> >> something else, too.  My one cent (again).)  You know how large
> >> these packets are?  Now that even refrigerators and light bulbs go
> >> online (and letting aside the privacy issues), it is all there, at
> >> your fingertips.  Sorry, i do not understand.
> >
> >
> > It is precisely because there is a difference between UTC and TAI (or
> GPS) that changes, and that there is no "universal" way to handle the
> change that it is a problem.  Mission critical systems will tend to figure
> something out, but it might be different.
> >
> > I worked on SCaN Testbed [1] - a system that flew on ISS for a number of
> years. This inconsistency of intepretation of time (UTC, GMT, GPST, TAI)
> led us to implement a flight rule "Turn off the power 1 hour before the
> leap second and turn it on 1 hour after".  That was easier than trying to
> get everyone on the same page (everyone is a remarkably large crowd -
> experiment PIs, test controllers and engineers, payload operators, ISS
> controllers, ISS internal data bus time distribution (Broadcast Ancillary
> Data on MIL-STD-1553), not to mention the entire pipeline of data links up
> to and back down all the way to the ops center.
> >
> > [1]R. C. Reinhart, T. J. Kacpura, S. K. Johnson and J. P. Lux, "NASA's
> space communications and navigation test bed aboard the international space
> station," in IEEE Aerospace and Electronic Systems Magazine, vol. 28, no.
> 4, pp. 4-15, April 2013, doi: 10.1109/MAES.2013.6506824.
> >
> >> And _i_ do not want to hear "o-ho-ho, but there is a difference in
> >> between solar time and the time zone anyhow", there is
> >> a difference also in between a priest and a wise man, and you
> >> better conform to the former or they kill you.  Really.
> >> (I would never let temples be driven by engineers, not even if
> >> they are permanently joined by their 

Re: [LEAPSECS] private smear goes public

[Michael Wouters]

According to this email,

http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/tz/2016-February/023209.html

the IERS will be adding a copyright notice allowing free use of the
leap second list.

Guess we just have to wait for the next one.

Cheers
Michael

On Sat, Dec 3, 2016 at 9:38 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp  wrote:
> 
> In message 
>