On Fri 2011-06-17T10:19:09 -0700, Steve Allen hath writ:
Here's something I missed until today: CCTF/09-38
http://www.bipm.org/cc/CCTF/Allowed/18/CCTF_09-38_CGPM-ITU-resp.pdf
the CIPM advises the 24th CGPM that henceforth the CGPM should
assume responsibility for the definition of
In message 20110620134625.ga3...@ucolick.org, Steve Allen writes:
In response, Dr Beard pointed
out that regulatory and related activities are also key issues for
definition of time scales, and that the ITU is an international
treaty organization with regulatory functions.
This
On Mon 2011-06-20T14:08:07 +, Poul-Henning Kamp hath writ:
In message 20110620134625.ga3...@ucolick.org, Steve Allen writes:
In response, Dr Beard pointed
out that regulatory and related activities are also key issues for
definition of time scales, and that the ITU is an
In message 20110620143007.ga3...@ucolick.org, Steve Allen writes:
The strength and reach of their arm is exaggerated by Dr. Beard and
coauthors [...]
This has nothing to do with who invented UTC, but about if their
lawful decisions get implemented or ignored.
If you want a relevant technical
If you want a relevant technical precedent, look at the OSI protocols:
They were ITU standards which everybody ignored in preference for
TCP/IP
which actually worked.
If only everybody had ignored them. In some European countries,
government policy on OSI was stronger than in others, and
On Mon 2011-06-20T21:51:16 +, Poul-Henning Kamp hath writ:
But the point remains: ITU cannot *force* people to use their
standards, thus my comment about the dubious reach of their arm.
If I understand the history, that fact underlies the history of this
whole leap second effort. The
In message 20110620215851.gh6...@ucolick.org, Steve Allen writes:
On Mon 2011-06-20T21:51:16 +, Poul-Henning Kamp hath writ:
My impression is that engineers who had to design working systems that
could not tolerate leaps had long ago surmised that the international
processes were too
On Jun 18, 2011, at 10:45 AM, Ian Batten wrote:
On 17 Jun 2011, at 18:19, Steve Allen wrote:
The CCTF realizes that some misunderstanding exists regarding
the scope of application of the various time scales. It
stresses that TAI is the uniform time scale underlying UTC,
Many thanks to Steve Allen who informed us on 2011-06-17 about
three revealing documents:
http://www.bipm.org/cc/CCTF/Allowed/18/CCTF_09-38_CGPM-ITU-resp.pdf
http://www.bipm.org/cc/CCTF/Allowed/18/CCTF_09-37_UTC_possible_redefinition.pdf
This hasn't even been fully correct during the times when UT1 was
observed with zenith telescopes (before about 1980). It is incorrect
today -- all the seven parameters of Earth orientation are of course
determined together, and UT0 is no longer needed nor used by anybody.
Are the
On 2011 Jun 18, at 09:31, Tom Van Baak wrote:
Are the details about UT1 correct in this link?
http://hpiers.obspm.fr/iers/bul/bulb/explanatory.html
I ask because a number of posters claim UT1 is a measure of
earth angle. At one level this is true, of course, but if I read that
document
On 17 Jun 2011, at 18:19, Steve Allen wrote:
The CCTF realizes that some misunderstanding exists regarding
the scope of application of the various time scales. It
stresses that TAI is the uniform time scale underlying UTC,
and that it should not be considered as an
On 2011 Jun 18, at 09:45, Ian Batten wrote:
That paper claims that GPS time follows UTC (USNO) modulo one second. I'm
trying to think of any meaning of the word modulo, be it from discrete
mathematics, HAKMEM or anywhere else, with which that makes sense. Can
anyone hazard a guess at the
Ian Batten said:
That paper claims that GPS time follows UTC (USNO) modulo one second. I'm
trying to think of any meaning of the word modulo, be it from discrete
mathematics, HAKMEM or anywhere else, with which that makes sense. Can
anyone hazard a guess at the meaning that is intended?
Here's something I missed until today: CCTF/09-38
http://www.bipm.org/cc/CCTF/Allowed/18/CCTF_09-38_CGPM-ITU-resp.pdf
the CIPM advises the 24th CGPM that henceforth the CGPM should
assume responsibility for the definition of international time
scales while the ITU continues
15 matches
Mail list logo
