On Jun 15, 2007, at 12:19 PM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Tom Van Baak"
writes:
OK, fast forward through the last 40 years.
One important thing to notice, is that notwithstanding the numeric
ration of pieces of kit, the telescopes etc. are staffed by
people with a significant clue in math and science, whereas at
least half of the computer-encumbered stuff is "staffed" by people
with below-average IQ.
Common sense says to isolate the hard proplem to the few&smart
rather than the many&dim...
Your argument does not fall on deaf ears (although see Gould's
"Mismeasure of Man" regarding IQ). And given your predilection for
waving wads of cash in astronomers' faces, I'd be delighted to see
your name on a review committee. However, it simply remains the fact
that there are two kinds of time - intervals and earth orientation.
They will continue to generate competing requirements. Astronomers
themselves use both kinds of time.
The assertion that only astronomers (and sextant navigators) care
about earth orientation is trivial to shoot down at the 1s per day
(one leap hour per decade) level. In fact, I think we wouldn't be
having this discussion at the tenth second per day (leap hour per
century) level. The question reduces to whether anybody other than
astronomers and navigators cares at the level of a few milliseconds
per day accumulated drift.
An extensive inventory is necessary to answer that question.
Rejecting its need beggars the imagination. Having spent the time
and money needed for such a "does this code need to introduce a DUT1
correction?" inventory, we would still be faced with the prospect of
what will actually happen to the embargoed leap seconds down the road.
Leap seconds are a conserved quantity, one way or another.
Rob Seaman
NOAO
_______________________________________________
LEAPSECS mailing list
LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
