In message 20081227.192200.-1749704408@bsdimp.com, M. Warner Losh write
s:
: The ITU has a responsibility to consider options with a long term
: future.
ITU has no such responsibility:
1 The purposes of the Union are:
a) to maintain and extend international
I wrote:
The ITU has a responsibility to consider options with a long term
future.
Poul-Henning Kamp writes:
ITU has no such responsibility:
1 The purposes of the Union are:
a) to maintain and extend international cooperation
among all its Member
In message bf590d36-97c8-49fe-a6e3-1e4634c5b...@noao.edu, Rob Seaman writes:
A global village implies global citizens. People have complex needs
that place more stringent timekeeping requirements of all sorts now
than 50 years ago.
Rob, you keep making these claims that a lot of 'needs' and
In message: c43e1c7d-f4ed-43bc-8b3e-3f7e62950...@noao.edu
Rob Seaman sea...@noao.edu writes:
: M. Warner Losh wrote:
:
: How is the Olson database fundamentally different than the
: historical data that a future historian would have based on the
: measurements of the delta
In message: 0b4062cc-0e7e-407f-a856-37f9c74dc...@noao.edu
Rob Seaman sea...@noao.edu writes:
: I wrote:
:
: The ITU has a responsibility to consider options with a long term
: future.
:
: Poul-Henning Kamp writes:
:
: ITU has no such responsibility:
:
: 1 The purposes of
On Sat, 27 Dec 2008, M. Warner Losh wrote:
However, the die was cast on this in 1958 when the second was defined in
terms of atomic behavior. At that point, the game was up, since the
basic unit of time was decoupled from the day.
The decoupling occurred before then, when the second was
On Sun, 28 Dec 2008, David Malone wrote:
Broad agreement and consensus is the foundation of civil time. The way
that leap seconds work clearly does not have enough consensus, in that
people still produce software and standards and specifications that
are incompatible with leap seconds.
On Sun, 28 Dec 2008, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
In addition to the Olsen database, the book Calendrical Calculations
is probably required.
Calendrical Calculations isn't a reliable source for historians in the
way that the Olson database tries to be. CC is a mechanized description of
how
Tony Finch wrote:
Calendrical Calculations isn't a reliable source for historians in the
way that the Olson database tries to be. CC is a mechanized description of
how calendars are supposed to work,
Actually it doesn't even fully achieve that. The numerical algorithms
are correct, as far as I
In message: 1062adb7-49b9-4374-9fa1-a0e0babb6...@noao.edu
Rob Seaman sea...@noao.edu writes:
: M. Warner Losh wrote:
:
: Leap seconds was a short-sighted agenda. The goal was noble,
:
: Wow! Even I wouldn't ascribe nobility to leap seconds :-)
Well, not in how they were thrust
In message: 0812282316.aa15...@ivan.harhan.org
msoko...@ivan.harhan.org (Michael Sokolov) writes:
: Rob Seaman sea...@noao.edu wrote:
:
: However, nobody has been arguing for rubber seconds.
:
: I have consistently been arguing for rubber seconds!
Just like rubber bullets, they are
In message: 0812290002.aa16...@ivan.harhan.org
msoko...@ivan.harhan.org (Michael Sokolov) writes:
: M. Warner Losh i...@bsdimp.com wrote:
:
: I know that nobody is proposing rubber seconds today.
:
: Wrong! I am!
I don't think that's a viable thing to do. It would play havoc with
In message: 0812290017.aa16...@ivan.harhan.org
msoko...@ivan.harhan.org (Michael Sokolov) writes:
: M. Warner Losh i...@bsdimp.com wrote:
:
: I don't think that's a viable thing to do. It would play havoc with
: anything except the most low-precision timing applications.
:
: But
M. Warner Losh wrote:
Experience has shown that multiple time scales lead to confusion.
The confusion is inherent in the system requirements. There are two
different kinds of timescale. That is a simple fact. How do we deal
with that reality? Wishing one away won't work.
Look at
M. Warner Losh wrote:
Michael Sokolov writes
: M. Warner Losh i...@bsdimp.com wrote:
:
: I know that nobody is proposing rubber seconds today.
:
: Wrong! I am!
I don't think that's a viable thing to do. It would play havoc with
anything except the most low-precision timing applications.
Michael Sokolov wrote:
But civil time *is* a low-precision timing application!
Civil time is not a timing application. It is not an application at
all. Whatever the past or future of civil timescales, these form
infrastructure that applications are built upon. Precision is one of
In message: 05ed4e1c-dc79-4f30-bd03-69a48940d...@noao.edu
Rob Seaman sea...@noao.edu writes:
: Maybe we can just call it Celsius time and make a Celsius second
: equal to 9/5 of a civil second (as of 1820).
hahahhahaha... Of course, the unit of time would have to be the
Newcomb..
In message: 3bf733cc-bcab-4b42-acb1-c903e98ea...@noao.edu
Rob Seaman sea...@noao.edu writes:
: M. Warner Losh wrote:
:
: Experience has shown that multiple time scales lead to confusion.
:
: The confusion is inherent in the system requirements. There are two
: different kinds of
Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
Rob Seaman writes:
Focus on the SI second and we see the world through atomic
eyeballs. Focus on the primacy of the definition of the day in
civil timekeeping, and Earth orientation pops out.
Both timescales are necessary.
It is well documented that the SI
19 matches
Mail list logo
