On Thu 2014-01-16T01:33:53 -0800, Tom Van Baak hath writ:
> What is a typical example of the legal definition of a day? Would
> that definition be affected if DUT1 were allowed to grow to 2 s or 10
> s or 60 s instead of 0.9 s?
In the United States one legal definition with significant financial
On 2014-01-15 11:36 PM, Steve Allen wrote:
On Thu 2014-01-16T06:55:00 +, Clive D.W. Feather hath writ:
Poul-Henning Kamp said:
What *has* been proposed, where I have seen it, is to remove
leap-seconds, and leave the "keep civil time in sync with the sun"
up to local governments who can mess
On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 10:18 AM, Steve Allen wrote:
> On Thu 2014-01-16T09:58:52 -0800, Eric Fort hath writ:
>> Maybe it's time for the minders
>> of astronomical periodicity and the minders of atomic periodicity to
>> simply agree to disagree about what "time" is at it's core and simply
>> use t
On Thu 2014-01-16T09:58:52 -0800, Eric Fort hath writ:
> Maybe it's time for the minders
> of astronomical periodicity and the minders of atomic periodicity to
> simply agree to disagree about what "time" is at it's core and simply
> use the timescale that is appropriate and useful for their own us
Eric Fort wrote:
|I'd be interested in the groups comments.
Follow me across the sea.
Where milky babies seem to be.
Molded, flowing revelry.
With the one that set them free.
Tell all the people that you see.
It's just me
|[.]I think the mass public
|would probably like to see their
On 15 Jan, 2014, at 14:58 , Richard Clark wrote:
> And as for counting-- it's not always in the realm of mathematicians.
> When you enter a building on ground level and you go to a room on the
> 1st floor do you expect to use the stairs or elevator? The answer depends
> on wheather you are in Eur
might there be a bit more simplicity added to this discussion. It
would seem to me that what is and is not a "clock" is not and should
not be the question. A clock tells time, whatever that is. Planetary
rotation, Planetary orbit, A pendulum, A quartz crystal, or a cesium
beam - none of thes
> INTERNATIONAL EARTH ROTATION AND REFERENCE SYSTEMS SERVICE (IERS)
>
>SERVICE INTERNATIONAL DE LA ROTATION TERRESTRE ET DES SYSTEMES DE REFERENCE
>
>
>SERVICE DE LA ROTATION TERRESTRE
>OBSERVATOIRE DE PARIS
>61, Av. de l'Observatoire 75014 PARIS (France)
>Tel. : 33 (0) 1 40 51 22 29
>FAX
On 16 Jan 2014, at 15:03, Warner Losh wrote:
>
> I think the answer for 1970-1990 is that most of them were aligned to local
> time (even if the system ticked in virtual UTC/GMT time) with sub-minute
> accuracy. Time alignment started to matter as more computers were networked
> together to w
On Jan 16, 2014, at 7:23 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> In message , Ian Batten
> wri
> tes:
>
>> It would be interesting to know what proportion of computers
>> 1975--2000 had their clocks aligned to within +/- 22 seconds of
>> anything, such that ignoring leap second was anything other than
>
In message , Ian Batten wri
tes:
>It would be interesting to know what proportion of computers
>1975--2000 had their clocks aligned to within +/- 22 seconds of
>anything, such that ignoring leap second was anything other than
>a second-order effect.
As a first order approximation:
Number of comp
On 16 Jan 2014, at 11:38, Tom Van Baak wrote:
>
> Yes, the Multics clock is very much like the one UNIX adopted. GCOS used a
> more traditional date and time format: 36-bits for date (mmddyy in BCD)
> I want to echo what others have said on this list, that even I of all people,
> did not thin
Tom Van Baak wrote:
>
> When I developed email in 1976 I encoded the BCD date (mmddyy) and BCD
> time (hhmmss) into two 18-bit binary fields. This worked because the
> maximum possible date was 123199, the maximum time was 235959, which
> just fit in the maximum half-word (2^18 = 262144).
That is
> The Multics clock design (a fixed bin (71), ie double word, representing
> microseconds
> since 00:00 01-01-1900) clearly informs the Unix one.
Was it 1900 or 1901? See:
http://www.multicians.org/jhs-clock.html
http://web.mit.edu/multics-history/source/Multics/ldd/bos/include/rdclock.incl.alm
h
In message <2747cb51-6467-4a14-92be-229901755...@batten.eu.org>, Ian Batten wri
tes:
>That ship's already sailed. Days are the intervals between successive
>civil time midnights,
...except in Norway and Denmark, and a few other select countries where
our language as a word for "24 hour period" (
On 16 Jan 2014, at 09:33, Tom Van Baak wrote:
>> This notion leaves open the question of the name UTC. In particular,
>> can the delegates to the ITU-R RA be persuaded to vote for a new
>> version of TF.460 if they are aware that the new wording will change
>> the legal definition of the word "
> This notion leaves open the question of the name UTC. In particular,
> can the delegates to the ITU-R RA be persuaded to vote for a new
> version of TF.460 if they are aware that the new wording will change
> the legal definition of the word "day" in every country which has
> adopted UTC as its
On 14 Jan 2014, at 23:53, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
>
> It's not like Ken & Dennis looked at leap-seconds and went "Naah,
> who cares", or even "braindead! We'll skip that."
I think it would require slightly more software archaeology to determine who
took what decisions about what. The docume
18 matches
Mail list logo
