Rob Seaman wrote:
> If it doesn't function as Universal Time it should not be referred
> to as a type of Universal Time.
Indeed. One need not deeply care for leap seconds to recognize the endless
potential for pain in messing up nomenclature and terminology, especially
in science.
This was made
On 6 Nov, 2014, at 20:16 , Sanjeev Gupta wrote:
> Anyone who wishes to believe 60 secs always to a minute can continue to do
> so. Anyone who needs the extra accuracy (time-nuts, astronomers, pedants,
> old men like me) will learn the fact that a minute is not always 60 secs.
> Anyone who is
On 11/9/14, Rob Seaman wrote:
> It's good to see new names appearing on the leapsecs list. Perhaps new
> folks might introduce themselves and describe the interest of their
> institutions in the proposed redefinition of UTC?
>
>
I have some science background, and am into conflict resolution and
