Hi everyone,
I came across this list somewhat randomly after seeing Tony Finch's link to
http://www.atnf.csiro.au/iau-comm31/activities.php ...
In the archives I saw a few postings (directly and indirectly) claiming that
for people using NTP / time sync all will be well. That's not true. NTP
On Mon 2011/01/31 22:11:36 -0800, Tom Van Baak wrote
in a message to: Leap Second Discussion List leapsecs@leapsecond.com
The leap day error is, what, 365.2425 : 365.24219 = 850 ppb;
while a leap second every two years is 16 ppb?
OK Tom, I'm prepared to accept those odds. I'll give you $16
if
On Mon 2011/01/31 22:25:29 -0800, Tom Van Baak wrote
in a message to: Leap Second Discussion List leapsecs@leapsecond.com
However, it is a very distant horizon.
The issue here is one man's distant horizon is another man's
pending disaster and the list has shown there is no convincing
either
On 1 February 2011 06:45, Rob Seaman sea...@noao.edu wrote:
Successful programming environments model the behavior of the real world, not
artificial constructs.
Perhaps some progress could be made on the predictable leap second
scheduling front? How would Java (or any software systems)
On 1 February 2011 05:12, Mark Calabretta mcala...@atnf.csiro.au wrote:
It is also a central problem of time_t: how do you map this
non-uniform-radix notation onto a uniform count that must always satisfy
properties that explicitly mandate a uniform-radix.
Vide the mapping of calendar date to
On 1 February 2011 10:09, Poul-Henning Kamp p...@phk.freebsd.dk wrote:
A: Ehh, we sort of don't know how long a year is...
Poul, this is not true for JSR-310. A year is 365-366 days long. A day
is a fundamental unit. Thus we know exactly how long each are.
Taking a second is the most
In message AANLkTikpq3XyEZhso+d=pb98mbhvr2v3mwaosjkct...@mail.gmail.com, Step
hen Colebourne writes:
Poul, this is not true for JSR-310. A year is 365-366 days long. A day
is a fundamental unit. Thus we know exactly how long each are.
I'm not talking about JSR-310, I'm talking reality.
Thanks
On Tue, 1 Feb 2011, Mark Calabretta wrote:
In the very distant future when the mean solar day is 86401 SI
seconds long (or hopefully well before that), the pretence that
the day is only 86400 SI seconds long, with its reductio ad
absurdum result of a leap-second-per-day, should hopefully
On Tue, 1 Feb 2011, Mark Calabretta wrote:
We all deal every day with a non-uniform and variable radix counting
system - 30 days hath September,
However the Gregorian calendar can be implemented in a few static lines of
code, which is orders of magnitude less than is required to handle
On 1 Feb 2011 at 10:31, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
Today, there is no leap second data, but zoneinfo data requires
running a script at the low JDK level and a JVM reboot. This is a
tricky system level operation that operators dislike.
Well, Windows users, for one, are very much used to being
It may not have been your intention, but from now on I will hear whatever
you type in a particular accent.
Gerry Ashton
On 2/1/2011 5:09 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
In messagee1pkcow-0005fn...@grus.atnf.csiro.au, Mark Calabretta writes:
OK Tom, I'm prepared to accept those odds. I'll give
Why is it that humankind has the irresistable impulse to make things
more complex and abstract until hardly anybody can understand them?
Things usually start out so simple a 5-year-old can understand them,
then progress to the point that it takes an advanced degree in a
specialized subject to
On Jan 31, 2011, at 11:59 AM, Finkleman, Dave wrote:
BTW, the Moslem day begins at observable moon rise, which is different
than sunset. Orthodox observers in several religions (Judiasm,
Islam,
and others) are very concerned about precise definitions of these
events
and timing of prayer
I have been invited to write an article on this subject for the
quarterly journal of Sigma Xi, American Scientist. Someone read our
AAS paper and thought the subject would be appropriate for the diverse
technical community. The style is that the report be understandable to
those with a solid
In message 9ba2c836-5910-4503-9454-2901e834b...@noao.edu, Rob Seaman writes:
In the Python oeuvre, surely Brazil's Central Services is the
most apt depiction of the International Telecommunications Union:
Actually, I think the dingy punchline is more appropriate:
I abhor the implication
On 01/31/2011 20:24, Daniel R. Tobias wrote:
On 31 Jan 2011 at 15:59, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
In message12988684-b911-481b-b557-90e55cd73...@noao.edu, Rob Seaman writes:
On Jan 31, 2011, at 1:07 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
Is there really a requirement to render the concept of universal
On 01/31/2011 22:12, Mark Calabretta wrote:
On Mon 2011/01/31 17:10:45 PDT, Warner Losh wrote
in a message to: leapsecs@leapsecond.com
Earlier threads have called this the 'non-uniform-radix' problem. It
has been argued that there are no discontinuities in UTC, with the 59:60
notation offered
On 02/01/2011 03:59, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
On 1 February 2011 05:12, Mark Calabrettamcala...@atnf.csiro.au wrote:
It is also a central problem of time_t: how do you map this
non-uniform-radix notation onto a uniform count that must always satisfy
properties that explicitly mandate a
In message 28f22009-2391-426c-8dc8-8de953708...@noao.edu, Rob Seaman writes:
On Feb 1, 2011, at 4:35 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
UTC is unpredictable is the core of the problem, and a problem
that must be solved, either by extending the predictability horizon
from six months to at least 10
On Feb 1, 2011, at 11:09 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
But Universal Time is *inherently* unpredictable. (That's its charm :-)
No, that's merely an artifact of how it is defined.
Note I said Universal Time not UTC. If you haven't picked up on the subtle
vibe, the astronomers here are
In message 63b1a158-8efc-4309-a04d-e147e2025...@noao.edu, Rob Seaman writes:
On Feb 1, 2011, at 11:09 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
But Universal Time is *inherently* unpredictable. (That's its charm :-)
No, that's merely an artifact of how it is defined.
Note I said Universal Time not UTC.
On Feb 1, 2011, at 12:05 PM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
Note that I said that's merely an artifact of how it is defined.,
not The name 'Universal Time' has an unchangeable magic meaning.
And I suppose Greenwich Mean Time is completely fair game, too. And Temps
Atomique International might
On 2011-02-01 11:35, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
Thanks to leap-seconds we do not know how long (certain) minutes
are, until Daniel tells us.
Daniel Gambis does not define certain time units, he just
communicates the difference TAI - UTC as soon as it becomes
known for another six
On 2/1/2011 3:24 PM, Michael Deckers wrote, in part:
On 2011-02-01 11:35, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
How could the unpredictable difference TAI - UTC be a
problem if everybody (including every computer) just kept UTC?
Michael Deckers.
___
On Tue, 1 Feb 2011, Michael Deckers wrote:
As far as the civil uses of time scales are concerned, it is actually
UTC rather than TAI that is currently more predictable: I can
predict with great certainty that I shall attend a group meeting
when UTC will be 2012-01-30 + 09 h, but
As long as there is time, coordinating time with events will be
difficult. The level at which things must be synchronized has descended
(or ascended) to less than nanoseconds. It is an example of
Finkleman's Principle of Conservation of Consternation. Many
alternatives discussed in this group
Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
They might just call the new leap-less timescale
Unified Time for Communication
What would that be in French? Probably Temps something something, right?
The acronym would presumably have to avoid both UTC for the English and Txx for
the French. Maybe CUT
On Tue 2011/02/01 10:09:35 -, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote
in a message to: Leap Second Discussion List leapsecs@leapsecond.com
And in extension of the previous discussion about words, I think
this provides us with the correct word to describe the deficiency
of the UTC timescale: unpredictable.
On Tue 2011/02/01 10:59:26 -, Stephen Colebourne wrote
in a message to: Leap Second Discussion List leapsecs@leapsecond.com
The fundamental problem is that there is no formula for determining
when leap seconds occur.
No, the rules for inserting leap seconds are simple enough in
On Tue 2011/02/01 11:37:59 -, Tony Finch wrote
in a message to: Leap Second Discussion List leapsecs@leapsecond.com
In the very distant future when the mean solar day is 86401 SI
seconds long (or hopefully well before that), the pretence that
the day is only 86400 SI seconds long, with
On Tue 2011/02/01 11:49:02 -, Tony Finch wrote
in a message to: Leap Second Discussion List leapsecs@leapsecond.com
However the Gregorian calendar can be implemented in a few static lines of
code, which is orders of magnitude less than is required to handle dynamic
updates of the leap second
On Tue 2011-02-01T16:53:24 -0700, Rob Seaman hath writ:
What would that be in French? Probably Temps something something, right?
The acronym would presumably have to avoid both UTC for the English and Txx
for the French. Maybe CUT as described at:
On 1 Feb 2011 at 13:23, Steve Allen wrote:
This is the problem which corporations solve by trademarks which allow
them ownership of words and ability to protect and change their
meaning.
Unless the trademark falls victim to genericide, where enough
people use it as a generic word that a
On 02/01/2011 16:53, Rob Seaman wrote:
Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
They might just call the new leap-less timescale
Unified Time for Communication
What would that be in French? Probably Temps something something, right?
The acronym would presumably have to avoid both UTC for the
On 02/01/2011 17:00, Mark Calabretta wrote:
On Tue 2011/02/01 11:37:59 -, Tony Finch wrote
in a message to: Leap Second Discussion Listleapsecs@leapsecond.com
In the very distant future when the mean solar day is 86401 SI
seconds long (or hopefully well before that), the pretence that
the
35 matches
Mail list logo
