[LEAPSECS] The Fuzzball

The Fuzzball https://www.eecis.udel.edu/~mills/database/papers/fuzz.pdf Ah. PDP 11 running RT11 (the RT stands for real-time, you know, and it was!). Bigger and much heavier than a breadbox it had a lot of power. Oh, wait, I mean it *used* a lot of power. And you could modify it with a solderi

Re: [LEAPSECS] The Fuzzball

We owe much to the pioneering work described in the article, and particularly to David Mills' contributions to computer timekeeping. On 2017-01-09 09:57 PM, Brooks Harris wrote: The Fuzzball https://www.eecis.udel.edu/~mills/database/papers/fuzz.pdf Ah. PDP 11 running RT11 (the RT stand

Re: [LEAPSECS] next leap second

On 2017-01-12 12:18 PM, Michael Shields via LEAPSECS wrote: On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 5:03 PM, Warner Losh wrote: On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 3:28 PM, Zefram wrote: It would be nice to have more sophisticated projections from IERS more than a year ahead. It would particularly help in evaluating th

Re: [LEAPSECS] next leap second

IERS Technical Note No. 36 IERS Conventions (2010) ftp://tai.bipm.org/iers/conv2010/tn36.pdf -Brooks On 2017-01-12 01:08 PM, Brooks Harris wrote: On 2017-01-12 12:18 PM, Michael Shields via LEAPSECS wrote: On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 5:03 PM, Warner Losh wrote: On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 3:28 PM

Re: [LEAPSECS] BBC radio Crowd Science

On 2017-01-30 10:12 AM, Steve Allen wrote: On Mon 2017-01-30T14:14:10 +, Tony Finch hath writ: I think what I was trying to get at (as others have already said in this thread) is that you can use the TAI-UTC delta to translate from UTC to TAI during a leap second, but you need more informati

Re: [LEAPSECS] BBC radio Crowd Science

On 2017-01-30 03:45 PM, Michael.Deckers. via LEAPSECS wrote: On 2017-01-30 19:21, Tom Van Baak wrote: 2017-01-01T00:00:36.5 - 36 s = 2016-12-31T23:59:60.5 What kind of arithmetic is that? Its not arithmetic. Its a YMDhms encoding of a TAI second. The Leap Second (TAI-UTC) metadata fro

Re: [LEAPSECS] BBC radio Crowd Science

On 2017-01-30 01:12 PM, Michael.Deckers. via LEAPSECS wrote: On 2017-01-30 13:06, Tony Finch wrote: It's tricky. Bulletin C is pretty clear about when it thinks TAI-UTC changes: from 2015 July 1, 0h UTC, to 2017 January 1 0h UTC : UTC-TAI = - 36s from 2017 January 1, 0h UTC, until

Re: [LEAPSECS] BBC radio Crowd Science

from TAI seconds using classic POSIX gmtime() (strict time_t and gmtime() operate on integral seconds) Two Leap Second metadata variables are required to support positive Leap Seconds: 1) TAI-UTC value 2) Is Leap Second - flag marking the actual Leap Second Negative Leap Seconds are not sup

Re: [LEAPSECS] BBC radio Crowd Science

On 2017-01-31 12:33 PM, Warner Losh wrote: On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 7:54 AM, Steve Summit wrote: Tom Van Baak and Michael Decker wrote: 2017-01-01T00:00:36.5 - 36 s = 2016-12-31T23:59:60.5 What kind of arithmetic is that? I think it ends up being roughly the same kind of arithmetic that tells

Re: [LEAPSECS] BBC radio Crowd Science

On 2017-01-31 01:52 PM, Warner Losh wrote: On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 2:39 PM, Tom Van Baak wrote: 2017-01-01T00:00:36.5 - 36 s = 2016-12-31T23:59:60.5 What kind of arithmetic is that? Hi Michael, First, there's no problem with this, right? (Thanks to Steve for catching typo) 2017-01-01T0

Re: [LEAPSECS] BBC radio Crowd Science

On 2017-01-31 02:04 PM, Warner Losh wrote: On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 11:58 AM, Brooks Harris wrote: On 2017-01-31 12:33 PM, Warner Losh wrote: On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 7:54 AM, Steve Summit wrote: Tom Van Baak and Michael Decker wrote: 2017-01-01T00:00:36.5 - 36 s = 2016-12-31T23:59:60.5

Re: [LEAPSECS] BBC radio Crowd Science

On 2017-01-31 02:19 PM, Warner Losh wrote: On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 12:08 PM, Steve Allen wrote: On Tue 2017-01-31T13:58:15 -0500, Brooks Harris hath writ: Ah, so who's right? I prefer to think of a leap second as being truly intercalary. It is saying to atomic clock "It's n

Re: [LEAPSECS] BBC radio Crowd Science

On 2017-01-31 02:32 PM, Warner Losh wrote: On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 12:13 PM, Brooks Harris wrote: On 2017-01-31 01:52 PM, Warner Losh wrote: On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 2:39 PM, Tom Van Baak wrote: 2017-01-01T00:00:36.5 - 36 s = 2016-12-31T23:59:60.5 What kind of arithmetic is that? Hi

Re: [LEAPSECS] BBC radio Crowd Science

On 2017-01-31 02:50 PM, GERRY ASHTON wrote: ...On January 31, 2017 at 7:08 PM Steve Allen wrote in part: I prefer to think of a leap second as being truly intercalary. It is saying to atomic clock "It's not tomorrow yet, wait a second." It is between one calendar day of UTC and the next calendar

Re: [LEAPSECS] BBC radio Crowd Science

On 2017-01-31 02:53 PM, Warner Losh wrote: On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 12:41 PM, Brooks Harris wrote: On 2017-01-31 02:04 PM, Warner Losh wrote: On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 11:58 AM, Brooks Harris wrote: On 2017-01-31 12:33 PM, Warner Losh wrote: On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 7:54 AM, Steve Summit

Re: [LEAPSECS] BBC radio Crowd Science

On 2017-01-31 03:52 PM, GERRY ASHTON wrote: How I would interpret "offset": Bulletin C 52 The difference between UTC and the International Atomic Time TAI is: from 2015 July 1, 0h UTC, to 2017 January 1 0h UTC : UTC-TAI = - 36s from 2017 January 1, 0h UTC, until further notice: UTC

Re: [LEAPSECS] BBC radio Crowd Science

On 2017-01-31 04:20 PM, Tim Shepard wrote: Richard Clark wrote, immediately comes to mind then it will have no difficulty handling the non-normalized 23:59:60 and putting it 86401 seconds after 00:00:00 earlier that day. So here you can apply the new value of (TAI-UTC) starting with the first

Re: [LEAPSECS] BBC radio Crowd Science

On 2017-01-31 04:44 PM, Warner Losh wrote: On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 2:20 PM, Brooks Harris wrote: It's the only way to encode one number such that the irregular radix math works out. I think I'm going to need an example I can work through to fully understand you here. When you get a

Re: [LEAPSECS] BBC radio Crowd Science

ormed contribution. And I think it's not "wrong". At least not yet. I think its "right", so far. :-) But it seems to have temporarily taken in (at least) Tom Van Baak and Brooks Harris, Standby. And I'm not sure Tom and I are seeing it the same way, yet. until we'

Re: [LEAPSECS] BBC radio Crowd Science

On 2017-01-31 04:15 AM, michael.deckers via LEAPSECS wrote: On 2017-01-30 21:36, Brooks Harris wrote: It seems to me this is where the UTC specifications are scattered over many documents and no one document makes it clear by itself, and this leaves

Re: [LEAPSECS] BBC radio Crowd Science

On 2017-02-01 07:39 AM, Steve Summit wrote: Brooks Harris wrote: On 2017-01-31 08:21 PM, Steve Summit wrote: I feel like I should apologize for my earlier contribution to it, which presented a nice-looking, persuasive-sounding argument which now looks an awful lot like it's... wrong. N

Re: [LEAPSECS] BBC radio Crowd Science

On 2017-02-01 10:12 AM, Steve Summit wrote: I wrote: For every let's-look-at-the-arithmetic argument that suggests we should use the "new" offset during the leap second, I can come up with one which suggests the opposite. (Basically it depends on whether you come at the leap second "from below"

Re: [LEAPSECS] BBC radio Crowd Science

On 2017-02-01 12:46 PM, Steve Allen wrote: On Wed 2017-02-01T10:50:12 -0500, Brooks Harris hath writ: https://www.itu.int/dms_pubrec/itu-r/rec/tf/R-REC-TF.460-6-200202-I!!MSW-E.doc Section C Coordinated universal time (UTC) says "UTC is the time-scale maintained by the BIPM, with assis

Re: [LEAPSECS] BBC radio Crowd Science

On 2017-02-03 04:30 PM, Warner Losh wrote: On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 11:14 PM, Warner Losh wrote: On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 10:37 PM, Zefram wrote: Warner Losh wrote: If you are going to willfully misunderstand, then I'm done being patient. I am not willfully misunderstanding. I have tried to un

Re: [LEAPSECS] BBC radio Crowd Science

On 2017-02-03 11:24 PM, Tom Van Baak wrote: Hi Warner, But consider TAI and UTC when they were equal, for the sake of argument. I know they never were, but if we look at what the first one would look like: That's a nice, clear example. Thanks. 23:59:58 23:59:58

Re: [LEAPSECS] Negative TAI-UTC

On 2017-02-04 12:24 PM, Warner Losh wrote: On Sat, Feb 4, 2017 at 9:41 AM, Clive D.W. Feather wrote: Looking only into the future, not historical data, what do people think the probability is that TAI-UTC will ever be negative? Should data structures be designed to handle this case or not bothe

Re: [LEAPSECS] Negative TAI-UTC

On 2017-02-04 03:27 PM, Warner Losh wrote: On Sat, Feb 4, 2017 at 11:12 AM, Brooks Harris wrote: On 2017-02-04 12:24 PM, Warner Losh wrote: On Sat, Feb 4, 2017 at 9:41 AM, Clive D.W. Feather wrote: Looking only into the future, not historical data, what do people think the probability is

Re: [LEAPSECS] BBC radio Crowd Science

On 2017-02-06 12:11 PM, Warner Losh wrote: On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 6:39 AM, Zefram wrote: Warner Losh wrote: So either there's some weird math that lets one subtract two numbers that are different and get 0 as the answer, or the delta has to change at the start. To the extent that they're diff

Re: [LEAPSECS] BBC radio Crowd Science

On 2017-02-06 06:30 PM, Tom Van Baak wrote: I'm not a GPS expert. IS-GPS-200G is dense. The TAI-UTC value is signaled, but how its encoded is complicated, and when its updated is unclear to me. See 20.3.3.5.2.4 Coordinated Universal Time (UTC). Can anyone speak to that and this topic? What does G

Re: [LEAPSECS] BBC radio Crowd Science

On 2017-02-09 02:28 AM, Warner Losh wrote: On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 4:30 PM, Brooks Harris wrote: If its after the Leap Second then your method doesn't work directly; you'd need to figure it out and make an internal adjustment to the TAI-UTC value a second *before* its supplied to

[LEAPSECS] On time -Brooks Harris

Philomena Cunk's Moments of Wonder Ep 1: Time https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NvpbW7JRu0Q ___ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com https://pairlist6.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs

[LEAPSECS] Set your alarms for 2.40am UTC -Brooks

Set your alarms for 2.40am UTC – so you can watch Unix time hit 1,500,000,000 It's gonna be spectacular! https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/07/13/unix_timestamp_epoch_making_moment/ -Brooks ___ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com https://pairl

Re: [LEAPSECS] first use of the terms UT0, UT1, and UT2

On 2017-10-15 03:28 PM, Steve Allen wrote: On Sun 2017-10-15T18:59:31+ Michael.Deckers via LEAPSECS hath writ: Thank you for these interesting primary sources! The more I reflect on this the more I realize that Nicolas Stoyko attended and took notes on many of the astronomy/time/radio mee

Re: [LEAPSECS] leap second roundup 2017

On 2017-10-23 09:58 AM, Rob Seaman wrote: Multiple timescales exist now for multiple purposes. Multiple timescales will exist under all scenarios. Debasing Universal Time is not a solution to any "real world" problem. If you want a new timescale, define a NEW timescale. Indeed. To me, the frus

Re: [LEAPSECS] leap second roundup 2017

On 2017-10-23 02:07 PM, Warner Losh wrote: On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 11:37 AM, Brooks Harris <mailto:bro...@edlmax.com>> wrote: On 2017-10-23 09:58 AM, Rob Seaman wrote: Multiple timescales exist now for multiple purposes. Multiple timescales will exist

Re: [LEAPSECS] leap second roundup 2017

On 2017-10-23 06:31 PM, Warner Losh wrote: On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 3:42 PM, Brooks Harris <mailto:bro...@edlmax.com>> wrote: On 2017-10-23 02:07 PM, Warner Losh wrote: Never has been really, but it was the objective for centuries. Local time is obviously a gross appr

[LEAPSECS] Ramifications of DST -Brooks

-Brooks ___ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com https://pairlist6.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs

Re: [LEAPSECS] Ramifications of DST -Brooks

artificial as that cart which couldn't possibly support that rock... :-) /tvb - Original Message - From: "Brooks Harris" To: "Leap Second Discussion List" Sent: Sunday, November 05, 2017 5:04 PM Subject: [LEAPSECS] Rami

Re: [LEAPSECS] current / future state of UT1 access?

On 2018-03-16 01:18 PM, Rob Seaman wrote: Meanwhile, over the past week or two I have not been able to connect to NIST's UT1 server: https://www.nist.gov/pml/time-and-frequency-division/time-services/ut1-ntp-time-dissemination My SNTP implementation reaches Judah's UT1 server today as "ut1-

Re: [LEAPSECS] current / future state of UT1 access?

On 2018-03-16 03:41 PM, Brooks Harris wrote: On 2018-03-16 01:18 PM, Rob Seaman wrote: Meanwhile, over the past week or two I have not been able to connect to NIST's UT1 server: https://www.nist.gov/pml/time-and-frequency-division/time-services/ut1-ntp-time-dissemination My

Re: [LEAPSECS] [Non-DoD Source] D.H. Sadler in 1954

On 2018-03-17 06:52 PM, Michael.Deckers via LEAPSECS wrote: [BIPM 2018] CGPM26 convocation: draft Resolution B [https://www.bipm.org/utils/en/pdf/CGPM/Convocation-2018.pdf] DocTranslator did a nice (free) job of translating this pdf to English - A) Download to your local drive B) Drag to Do

Re: [LEAPSECS] D.H. Sadler in 1954

Hi John, On 2018-03-19 01:12 AM, John Sauter wrote: On Sat, 2018-03-17 at 22:52 +, Michael.Deckers via LEAPSECS wrote: So, the likely future is that the limit on |UT1 - UTC| will be dropped, leap seconds will no longer be applied, and UTC will become a fixed translate of TAI

Re: [LEAPSECS] Windows Server 2019

On 2018-07-19 04:44 AM, Hal Murray wrote: As a IT professional, and author of date/time libraries, I cannot stress enough how much a standard is needed here. We are going to have both UTC (with leap seconds) and systems that smear ("UT-Smear") and there is currently no agreed way to define the la

Re: [LEAPSECS] Windows Server 2019

On 2018-07-19 07:06 AM, Hal Murray wrote: I think it does matter. I, for one, would be interested in credible explanation of the "smears", and, if these have been coordinated, by whom, and how. Here is Google's documentation: https://developers.google.com/time/smear We encourage anyone smea

Re: [LEAPSECS] no more listening to leap seconds?

On 2018-08-10 05:55 PM, Tom Van Baak wrote: >From what I understand the same "threat" occurred in 2017 with the FY18 budget. In the end, the budget ended up greater even than what was asked. So no cuts were made. Who knows what will happen this time. Still, it's always a concern; for the staff,

Re: [LEAPSECS] no more listening to leap seconds?

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY NATIONAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION SERVICE FISCAL YEAR 2018 BUDGET SUBMISSION TO CONGRESS http://www.osec.doc.gov/bmi/budget/FY18CBJ/FY%202018%20NIST-NTIS%20Cong%20Budget%20Request%20-%20508%20Compliant%20-%20FINAL.pdf pp31 - Time and Fundamental Measu

Re: [LEAPSECS] Celebrating the new year a few seconds late

On 2019-01-01 9:36 AM, Philip Newton wrote: On Tue, 1 Jan 2019 at 15:33, Daniel R. Tobias wrote: A lot of Americans synchronize their new year celebrations to the drop of the ball in Times Square as seen on TV, which means they celebrate a few seconds late because digital TV has an inherent del

Re: [LEAPSECS] Celebrating the new year a few seconds late

On 2019-01-01 9:51 AM, Rob Seaman wrote: When quantum TVs hit the market you'll hear half of each individual house cheering and the other half wailing. -- This may create a new phenomenon where everyone in the audience is both dead and alive. I wonder what clinical procedures psychology wil

Re: [LEAPSECS] Celebrating the new year a few seconds late

On 2019-01-01 4:06 PM, Robert Jones wrote: I think you will find that Big Ben is temporarily reactivated for the new year chimes. ___ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com https://pairlist6.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs

Re: [LEAPSECS] Celebrating the new year a few seconds late

On 2019-01-04 9:14 AM, Jonathan E. Hardis wrote: On Jan 1, 2019, at 1:03 PM, Brooks Harris <mailto:bro...@edlmax.com>> wrote: Back in the days of analog TV (which is still used in some parts of the world) the broadcast TV signal was one of the most stable time sources around.

Re: [LEAPSECS] Running on TAI

On 2019-01-17 12:38 PM, Steve Allen wrote: On Thu 2019-01-17T18:12:25+0100 Martin Burnicki hath writ: Hm, maybe that was originally the case. I wonder whether the folks who wrote the text just had UTC in mind when they "invented" time_t. The best insight into the POSIX committee was posted on L

Re: [LEAPSECS] the epoch of TAI, with no more doubt

On 2019-01-19 7:50 PM, Steve Allen wrote: On Wed 2019-01-16T00:56:19-0800 Steve Allen hath writ: The epoch of TAI, and LORAN, and GPS is 1961-01-01T20:00:00 UT2. Or maybe 1961-01-00 UT2. I took a closer read and cross reference of the relevant issues of Bulletin Horaire and finalized my web p

Re: [LEAPSECS] Windows 10 time

also presented my work on accurate local time: Accurate Local Timestamps Brooks Harris https://www.ion.org/publications/abstract.cfm?articleID=16763 and Matsakis, Levine, Lombardi at ION last year. I am impressed that Microsoft has managed to go somewhere that POSIX still refuses to go. I agree

Re: [LEAPSECS] Windows 10 time

On 2019-04-12 11:49 AM, Warner Losh wrote: On Fri, Apr 12, 2019 at 9:39 AM Brooks Harris <mailto:bro...@edlmax.com>> wrote: Hopefully Linux will follow suit in some manner. This might be accompanied with updating POSIX time in some manner to support Leap Seconds.. Th

Re: [LEAPSECS] leap seconds in POSIX

On 2020-01-27 7:38 AM, Warner Losh wrote: On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 8:17 AM Steve Summit > wrote: Hal Murray wrote: > Does anybody know of a good writeup of how to fix POSIX to know about > leap seconds and/or why POSIX hasn't done anything about it y

Re: [LEAPSECS] leap seconds in POSIX

On 2020-01-27 11:52 AM, Steve Allen wrote: On Mon 2020-01-27T19:33:37+ Tony Finch hath writ: It looks like we're in another long gap, based on the LOD chart and the UT1-UTC prediction. The current gap is now the second longest... In the middle of last year the rotation of the earth accelera

Re: [LEAPSECS] leap seconds in POSIX

On 2020-01-28 12:15 AM, Martin Burnicki wrote: Brooks Harris wrote: Evolution of Timekeeping in Windows https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/t5/networking-blog/evolution-of-timekeeping-in-windows/ba-p/778020 Interesting that they call it "the (r)evolutionary changes to time keeping i

Re: [LEAPSECS] leap seconds in POSIX

On 2020-01-30 7:02 AM, Tom Van Baak wrote: Hal, I see some good comments; did you get the answer you wanted? My take: > Does anybody know of a good writeup of how to fix POSIX to know about leap seconds > and/or why POSIX hasn't done anything about it yet? No write-up. No fix. It's not possi

Re: [LEAPSECS] leap seconds in POSIX

On 2020-02-01 3:01 AM, Hal Murray wrote: t...@leapsecond.com said: I see some good comments; did you get the answer you wanted? Nothing off list, so you have seen everything that I saw. I was hoping that there would be a good white paper or blog that discussed all the possibilities that have

Re: [LEAPSECS] leap seconds in POSIX

On 2020-02-01 9:39 AM, Brooks Harris wrote: On 2020-01-30 7:02 AM, Tom Van Baak wrote: Hal, I see some good comments; did you get the answer you wanted? My take: > Does anybody know of a good writeup of how to fix POSIX to know about leap seconds > and/or why POSIX hasn't do

Re: [LEAPSECS] Leap seconds have a larger context than POSIX

On 2020-02-03 10:37 AM, Michael Deckers via LEAPSECS wrote: The 1970 report also contains the proposal that the CIPM should be responsible for the definition of UTC, and 49 years later, the CGPM in 2019 seems to have taken on that task with the resolution [https://www.bipm.org/en/CG

Re: [LEAPSECS] Leap seconds have a larger context than POSIX

On 2020-02-04 2:54 AM, Warner Losh wrote: Have I forgotten any of the other details of leap seconds that are more tribal knowledge than rigorously specified? Warner I think another unclear topic is when the value of DTAI ("The value of the difference TAI – UTC") is updated. This is not cle

Re: [LEAPSECS] Leap seconds have a larger context than POSIX

On 2020-02-06 5:22 AM, Tom Van Baak wrote: Hi Hal, It's 2020. How on earth can NTP still not implement UTC correctly, in all cases? Or is it a fundamental NTP design flaw? The Z3801A issue doesn't sound like an NTP problem. This is a known legacy Z3801A f/w or Motorola Oncore problem, yes?

Re: [LEAPSECS] Leap seconds have a larger context than POSIX

On 2020-02-06 9:08 AM, Warner Losh wrote: On Thu, Feb 6, 2020, 3:22 AM Tom Van Baak > wrote: Hi Hal, It's 2020. How on earth can NTP still not implement UTC correctly, in all cases? Or is it a fundamental NTP design flaw? Design flaw. NTP time stamps

Re: [LEAPSECS] Leap seconds have a larger context than POSIX

On 2020-02-06 7:28 AM, Seaman, Robert Lewis - (rseaman) wrote: Hello all, The fundamental answer / constraint to all questions of engineering, including temporal engineering, is funding. No bucks, no Buck Rogers. "Time" is a vast topic, pretty much as big as "space". Precision timekeeping to

Re: [LEAPSECS] DUT1 = 0

THE PLANET INSIDE Scientists are probing the secrets of the inner core---and learning how it might have saved life on Earth https://www.science.org/content/article/scientists-probing-secrets-earths-inner-core-saved-life-planet An accelerating high-latitude jet in Earth's core https://eprints.wh

Re: [LEAPSECS] fb/meta join the leap second haters

On 2022-07-26 7:33 PM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: So looking at the IERS LOD plot going all the way back it seems to me that we have been missing the big signal for about five decades: https://datacenter.iers.org/singlePlot.php?plotname=EOPC04_14_62-NOW_IAU2000A-LOD&id=224 How did we not

[LEAPSECS] The Variable Earth’s Rotation in the 4th–7th Centuries: New ΔT Constraints,from Byzantine Eclipse Records

The Variable Earth’s Rotation in the 4th–7th Centuries: New ΔT Constraints from Byzantine Eclipse Records https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1538-3873/ac6b56/pdf ___ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com https://pairlist6.pair.net/mailman

[LEAPSECS] Global timekeepers vote to scrap leap second by 2035

Global timekeepers vote to scrap leap second by 2035 https://phys.org/news/2022-11-global-timekeepers-vote-scrap.html ___ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com https://pairlist6.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs

[LEAPSECS] Multidecadal variation of the Earth’s inner-core rotation

Terrawatch: why has the Earth’s spinning inner core slowed down? https://www.theguardian.com/science/2023/feb/22/terrawatch-earth-spinning-inner-core-slowed-down Multidecadal variation of the Earth’s inner-core rotation https://www.nature.com/articles/s41561-022-01112-z.epdf?sharing_token=FE2fAKi

[LEAPSECS] Using a gyroscope to measure variations in Earth's rotation

Using a gyroscope to measure variations in Earth's rotation https://phys.org/news/2023-09-gyroscope-variations-earth-rotation.html ___ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com https://pairlist6.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs

[LEAPSECS] Challenging assumptions: The 8.5-year rhythm of Earth's inner core

Challenging assumptions: The 8.5-year rhythm of Earth's inner core https://phys.org/news/2023-12-assumptions-year-rhythm-earth-core.html Inner core static tilt inferred from intradecadal oscillation in the Earth’s rotation https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-023-43894-9 _

Re: [LEAPSECS] negative leap second in 2029?

The Duncan Agnew's paper is behind a Nature paywall. However there's a complimentary version at The Verge; Melting ice, missing seconds. https://www.theverge.com/2024/3/27/24113810/melting-ice-missing-seconds which leads to: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-024-07170-0.epdf?sharing_token

[LEAPSECS] Contributions of core, mantle and,climatological processes to Earth’s,polar motion

Contributions of core, mantle and climatological processes to Earth’s polar motion https://www.nature.com/articles/s41561-024-01478-2 ___ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com https://pairlist6.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs

[LEAPSECS] Standards of time zones -Brooks Harris

rds or implementation guidance documents in force? I'm aware of tz databse, of course, but here too there seems to be lack of clarity about what rules are being implemented, or, at least, I've found no consolidated statements of those rules there. Comments and guidence welcomed, thanks very much, -Brooks Harris ___ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs

Re: [LEAPSECS] Standards of time zones -Brooks Harris

014-01-07 03:40 PM, Warner Losh wrote: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-5wpm-gesOY is required viewing. Warner On Jan 7, 2014, at 4:22 PM, Brooks Harris wrote: Hi, First, this is my first posting to your list, forgive me if the subject has been covered. Second, I am a colleague Stephen Sc

Re: [LEAPSECS] Standards of time zones -Brooks Harris

On 2014-01-07 03:40 PM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: In message <52cc8c26.5090...@edlmax.com>, Brooks Harris writes: I fully understand time zone specifications are fractured. My objective is to determine what standards are most relevant currently, that is, what standards may be consider

Re: [LEAPSECS] Standards of time zones -Brooks Harris

On 2014-01-07 03:58 PM, Warner Losh wrote: On Jan 7, 2014, at 4:56 PM, Brooks Harris wrote: Oh yes, I've see that. Noted from this list. To me its both hysterical and deeply troubling. On the one hand, it bemuses me to see someone else's programming pain so well presented, mirror

Re: [LEAPSECS] Standards of time zones -Brooks Harris

On 2014-01-07 06:34 PM, Rob Seaman wrote: On Jan 7, 2014, at 7:31 PM, Warner Losh wrote: On Jan 7, 2014, at 5:50 PM, Brooks Harris wrote: Yeah, I'm sure most on this list have similar experience. Hey, we could start a reality tv show! Leap second war story death match! ...and it wou

Re: [LEAPSECS] Standards of time zones -Brooks Harris

On 2014-01-07 08:23 PM, Warner Losh wrote: On Jan 7, 2014, at 9:16 PM, Brooks Harris wrote: On 2014-01-07 06:34 PM, Rob Seaman wrote: On Jan 7, 2014, at 7:31 PM, Warner Losh wrote: On Jan 7, 2014, at 5:50 PM, Brooks Harris wrote: Yeah, I'm sure most on this list have similar exper

Re: [LEAPSECS] Standards of time zones -Brooks Harris

On 2014-01-08 09:34 PM, Steve Allen wrote: On Wed 2014-01-08T12:11:39 -0800, Brooks Harris hath writ: Who, or what standards body, would have the (international) authority to be taken seriously? I'm not sure about that, but since the whole time-keeping mess was started out by astronom

Re: [LEAPSECS] Standards of time zones -Brooks Harris

Hi Magnus, On 2014-01-09 02:11 PM, Magnus Danielson wrote: Hi Brooks, Welcome to the list! On 08/01/14 01:45, Brooks Harris wrote: On 2014-01-07 03:40 PM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: In message <52cc8c26.5090...@edlmax.com>, Brooks Harris writes: I fully understand time zone specific

Re: [LEAPSECS] Standards of time zones -Brooks Harris

Hi Rob, On 2014-01-09 04:18 PM, Rob Seaman wrote: On Jan 9, 2014, at 4:58 PM, Brooks Harris wrote: Well, its clear the "end game" would take a long time to realize. It will take serious patience on the part of folks who care. We’re halfway there, then ;-) This conversation has

<    1   2   3