Our librarian has assigned the Library of Congress classification QB213 .R4
2013 to the proceedings of “Requirements for UTC and Civil Timekeeping on
Earth” (ISBN 978-0-87703-603-6, http://futureofutc.org/preprints/). Looking on
the shelf, this is next to the proceedings for IAU Symposium 11, “
On Wed 2014-01-15T16:56:20 -0700, Rob Seaman hath writ:
> Both volumes contain transcriptions of discussions during the
> meetings. On p. 35 of the IAU #11 volume we have this harbinger of
> things to come (following G. M. Clemence
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1959AJ.64..113C
> Following
Rob,
Glad you got a chance to read that volume. I thought Steve and I were the only
ones who spent time reading the history of atomic timescales over the last
century. It's really quite fascinating, if you have the time.
> “Dr. STOYKO commented that even though the atomic standard is not a clock
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
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 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
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
Eric Fort wrote:
> As for those simply going about their daily lives and wishing to make
> a schedule within seconds or even minutes I think the mass public
> would probably like to see their wall clocks remain in sync with the
> rotation of the planet on which they presently reside.
Note that D
Tony Finch wrote:
|Eric Fort wrote:
|> a schedule within seconds or even minutes I think the mass public
|> would probably like to see their wall clocks remain in sync with the
|> rotation of the planet on which they presently reside.
|
|Note that DST exists because people prefer to set the
On Jan 17, 2014, at 5:17 AM, Tony Finch wrote:
> Note that DST exists because people prefer to set their clocks to sunrise
> than to midday, but sunrise is too inconvenient so we use a quantized
> approximation.
DST exists for a complex set of sociological and political reasons. Whatever
the
10 matches
Mail list logo
