In message 5a6aa69b-16ab-4896-a0f0-825e5cfc7...@noao.edu, Rob Seaman writes:
On Jan 30, 2011, at 3:44 AM, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
to imagine the reaction of some of my colleagues when they realize
the hit to their always tight budgets to deal with this artificial
crisis. A *much* larger fuss
On Sat, 29 Jan 2011, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
Thus, no matter what, the Sun must peak at midday and it be night at
midnight, with adjustments to ensure that based on time-zones. Since
stopping leap seconds breaks that basic principle, it became
unacceptable.
Actually the sun doesn't peak at
On 31 January 2011 12:48, Tony Finch d...@dotat.at wrote:
On Sat, 29 Jan 2011, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
Thus, no matter what, the Sun must peak at midday and it be night at
midnight, with adjustments to ensure that based on time-zones. Since
stopping leap seconds breaks that basic principle,
On Jan 31, 2011, at 1:07 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
I pointed out a long time ago, that if astronomers played their cards right,
this would be a funding opportunity for much needed renovations...
Bwa-ha-ha-ha!
Calling any such new timescale something other than UTC (or not
UT-anything,
In message 12988684-b911-481b-b557-90e55cd73...@noao.edu, Rob Seaman writes:
On Jan 31, 2011, at 1:07 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
Is there really a requirement to render the concept of universal
time meaningless? Or is UTC merely collateral damage from an
intellectually lazy campaign to
On 31 January 2011 15:59, Poul-Henning Kamp p...@phk.freebsd.dk wrote:
In message 12988684-b911-481b-b557-90e55cd73...@noao.edu, Rob Seaman writes:
On Jan 31, 2011, at 1:07 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
Is there really a requirement to render the concept of universal
time meaningless? Or is UTC
On Jan 31, 2011, at 8:59 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
In message 12988684-b911-481b-b557-90e55cd73...@noao.edu, Rob Seaman writes:
On Jan 31, 2011, at 1:07 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
Is there really a requirement to render the concept of universal time
meaningless? Or is UTC merely
On Sun, 30 Jan 2011, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
The idea that midday or midnight would cease to have the same meaning to
an average person is horrid and I would suggest something that some
politicians would get very worked up about.
In other words, I flat out don't believe that the tinkering
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
On Sat, 29 Jan 2011, Warner Losh wrote:
A second minor point: TAI does not exist before this point. Proleptic TAI is
used, but more often TT is used for epochs prior to the present. I'd just
note here that a proleptic TAI is used for dates prior to the 1958 epoch.
How is proleptic TAI
On Sat, 29 Jan 2011, Finkleman, Dave wrote:
Ken, John Seago, and I delivered a paper to the AAS last August that
includes many of the thoughts in this thread.
Is a copy of the paper available online?
Tony.
--
f.anthony.n.finch d...@dotat.at http://dotat.at/
HUMBER THAMES DOVER WIGHT
On Mon 2011-01-31T17:21:48 +, Tony Finch hath writ:
On Sat, 29 Jan 2011, Finkleman, Dave wrote:
Ken, John Seago, and I delivered a paper to the AAS last August that
includes many of the thoughts in this thread.
Is a copy of the paper available online?
On Jan 31, 2011, at 9:46 AM, Tony Finch wrote:
Remember that the politicians already have a mechanism to adjust their local
time to match the hours of daylight to their satisfaction. Time zones are not
going away.
Yes, politicians control local time. UTC is not local. Smooshing time zones
On Mon, 31 Jan 2011, Steve Allen wrote:
http://www.agi.com/downloads/resources/user-resources/downloads/whitepapers/DebateOverUTCandLeapSeconds.pdf
Thanks!
Tony.
--
f.anthony.n.finch d...@dotat.at http://dotat.at/
HUMBER THAMES DOVER WIGHT PORTLAND: NORTH BACKING WEST OR NORTHWEST, 5 TO 7,
On 01/31/2011 10:00, Tony Finch wrote:
On Sat, 29 Jan 2011, Warner Losh wrote:
A second minor point: TAI does not exist before this point. Proleptic TAI is
used, but more often TT is used for epochs prior to the present. I'd just
note here that a proleptic TAI is used for dates prior to the
On 01/31/2011 09:17, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
On 31 January 2011 15:59, Poul-Henning Kampp...@phk.freebsd.dk wrote:
In message12988684-b911-481b-b557-90e55cd73...@noao.edu, Rob Seaman writes:
On Jan 31, 2011, at 1:07 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
Is there really a requirement to render the
Greetings Dave Finkleman,
On Mon 2011-01-31T11:59:21 -0500, Finkleman, Dave hath writ:
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
In message 20110131182800.gx20...@ucolick.org, Steve Allen writes:
We are not the only customers of this system. We understand that some
of these telescopes have been sold to DoD and other customers whose
usage of the telescope pointing system is for satellite tracking. I
doubt that their
On Mon 2011-01-31T18:33:42 +, Poul-Henning Kamp hath writ:
And you don't think a software update in the next 8-10 years could fix
that issue, given that DoD is likely to lean on the vendor to get
this fixed ?
A more relevant question is the likelihood of a successful result,
and about that
On Jan 31, 2011, at 11:33 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
And you don't think a software update in the next 8-10 years could fix that
issue, given that DoD is likely to lean on the vendor to get this fixed ?
Fix is not the right word for something that is not currently broken.
That said, it is
On 01/31/2011 12:07, Rob Seaman wrote:
This latency, however, is as likely to be negative as positive. With knowledge
that the standard was due to change, it might well be the case that an earlier
leap second during that 5 year window would be embargoed. Leap seconds have
historically been
On Mon 2011-01-31T12:40:27 -0700, Warner Losh hath writ:
However, given the tolerance of DUT1 is .9 and not .5, I'm sure that an
extra last leap second could be tossed in to give vendors more time to
cope...
In that is the nugget of how leap seconds are no different
announcements that the
On 31 January 2011 19:57, Steve Allen s...@ucolick.org wrote:
In that is the nugget of how leap seconds are no different
announcements that the daylight/summer time zones transition will
happen at some date other than the previous schedule.
(e.g., due to some sports event like the 2000
___
LEAPSECS mailing list
LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
On 01/31/2011 15:55, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
By comparison, leap seconds add a new time representation 23:59:60
which exists in no other way. Its the creation of the new time that is
problematic.
Earlier threads have called this the 'non-uniform-radix' problem. It
has been argued that
On 31 Jan 2011 at 15:59, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
In message 12988684-b911-481b-b557-90e55cd73...@noao.edu, Rob Seaman writes:
On Jan 31, 2011, at 1:07 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
Is there really a requirement to render the concept of universal
time meaningless? Or is UTC merely
On Mon 2011/01/31 10:38:33 PDT, Warner Losh wrote
in a message to: leapsecs@leapsecond.com
Keep in mind that the time scales involved for such a drift are measured
in centuries. Also, the rate at which the earth is slowing is
geometrically increasing, so we have the coming quadratic collapse
On Mon 2011/01/31 17:10:45 PDT, Warner Losh wrote
in a message to: leapsecs@leapsecond.com
Earlier threads have called this the 'non-uniform-radix' problem. It
has been argued that there are no discontinuities in UTC, with the 59:60
notation offered as proof. However, this moves UTC from a
Leap seconds differ from leap days only in their unpredictability.
Careful. Actually, you can go a lot more seconds of predictable
leap seconds than you can go days with predictable leap years
using the current 4/100/400 leap day rule.
The leap day error is, what, 365.2425 : 365.24219 = 850
The fundamental problem is that there is no formula for determining
when leap seconds occur.
True. You'll notice the continuous/discontinuous subject comes
up everytime someone new joins the list. Those words try to
convey an easy concept that all of us know well but no one can
quite say
However, it is a very distant horizon.
The issue here is one man's distant horizon is another man's
pending disaster and the list has shown there is no convincing
either side.
One way to think of it though, is in terms of the lifetime of the
technology involved. If your java class is expected
The threads are coming fast and furious and one has to choose what to reply to.
On Jan 31, 2011, at 11:25 PM, Tom Van Baak wrote:
The issue here is one man's distant horizon is another man's pending disaster
and the list has shown there is no convincing either side.
I'd say rather that we
32 matches
Mail list logo
