On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 7:01 AM, Harlan Stenn wrote:
> I'm still thinking the answer is "leave existing 'names' alone - if you
> want TAI use TAI. If you want UTC, use UTC. If you want something new,
> call it something new."
>
> If people are using a defined name for a defined purpose and it wo
"Clive D.W. Feather" writes:
> Harlan Stenn said:
>> I'm still thinking the answer is "leave existing 'names' alone - if
>> you want TAI use TAI. If you want UTC, use UTC. If you want
>> something new, call it something new."
>>
>> If people are using a defined name for a defined purpose and it w
What is the "unacceptable risk"?? Just what are we risking? We have had Leap
Seconds since 1972, and after 42+ years we
seem to be doing OK!
--- Skip Newhall ---
Valencia, California USA
E-Mail: x...@sn.to
Phone: 1-661-259-
-Ori
Harlan Stenn said:
> I'm still thinking the answer is "leave existing 'names' alone - if you
> want TAI use TAI. If you want UTC, use UTC. If you want something new,
> call it something new."
>
> If people are using a defined name for a defined purpose and it works
> for them, leave it alone. If
"Poul-Henning Kamp" writes:
>
> In message <20141030143121.ga20...@ucolick.org>, Steve Allen writes:
>
> >I wonder if the ITU-R process can go to its completion without
> >introducing any document which points out that to omit leap seconds
> >from a time scale called UTC is to redefine th
Well, for historical and archival purposes Julian date nearly always means
traditional days, as in solar days. But for astronomical uses a fixed
unit, the apocryphal atomic day is implied. This means needing to know
delta T if you need to relate it back to a civil date or time.
The term 'day' has
I see Terrestrial Time being expressed as a Julian Date quite
a lot. What is the unit of that number if not "Day"?
Dennis Ferguson
On 30 Oct, 2014, at 09:16 , Rob Seaman wrote:
> "Day" is a fundamental physical fact about a planet or moon. "Minute" is an
> artificial concept. Its intuitive r
"Day" is a fundamental physical fact about a planet or moon. "Minute" is an
artificial concept. Its intuitive role as a fraction of a day takes precedence
over serving as a round number of equally artificial SI seconds. There are two
kinds of time that must be accommodated.
Rob Seaman
NOAO
-
In message <20141030143121.ga20...@ucolick.org>, Steve Allen writes:
>I wonder if the ITU-R process can go to its completion without
>introducing any document which points out that to omit leap seconds
>from a time scale called UTC is to redefine the word "day".
You mean the same way lea
Just after the WP7A activity in Geneva earlier this month
the CGSIC declared that leap seconds are unacceptable risk.
http://www.gps.gov/cgsic/timing/2014-resolution/
Their history neglects that initial need for leap seconds was to
satisfy the demands of the IAU and navigation community that the
r
> On 28 Oct 2014, at 00:46, Rob Seaman wrote:
>
> Their actions should aspire to agree with physical reality.
Anything which alludes (whether intentionally or unintentionally) to Feynman's
magisterial dissection of the Shuttle programme is OK by me!
> For a successful technology, reality mu
11 matches
Mail list logo
