There's a lot of overlap between timekeepers and astronomers. I'm not sure I
embrace the battle metaphor, but if so this would have to be a civil war.
The fundamental issue remains that atomic time and synodic time are two
different things. Thus the BIPM's implicit attempt to divorce the word
I can understand points 1 through 8, 10, and 11, but . . .
What is gained by point 9 stating that UT1 should not be considered as a
time scale?
Kevin
Kevin K. Birth, Professor
Department of Anthropology
Queens College, City University of New York
65-30 Kissena Boulevard
Flushing, NY 11367
In message a72f135c-ce3f-48df-bc61-6ab4e68e7...@noao.edu, Rob Seaman writes:
There's a lot of overlap between timekeepers and astronomers.
There's a lot of overlap between bioinformatics and ornitology.
Was there any relevant point you were trying to make ?
The fundamental issue remains that
Hi Kevin,
I can understand points 1 through 8, 10, and 11, but . . .
What is gained by point 9 stating that UT1 should not be considered as a time
scale?
Well, then, let's examine the text in question (bold, underline and italics in
original - don't know if French and English are
On Mar 20, 2013, at 2:20 PM, Rob Seaman wrote:
2. a continuous reference time scale corresponds to UTC without leap
second discontinuities;
And also corresponds to UTC with leap seconds. There are no discontinuities.
discontinuities here means irregularity not the a violation of the
On Mar 20, 2013, at 2:29 PM, Warner Losh i...@bsdimp.com wrote:
TAI isn't disseminated.
Well, yes it is. From ITU-R TF.460-6:
E DTAI
The value of the difference TAI – UTC, as disseminated with time signals, shall
be denoted DTAI. DTAI = TAI − UTC may be regarded as a correction to be added
I would propose that ITU is using continuity and uniformity in their
mathematical definitions, implying that the intent is that at least in
definitional theory, UTC be mathematically continuous with all its
derivatives (noise being ignored). This would exclude step discontinuities
(leap seconds)
On Mar 20, 2013, at 6:02 PM, Joseph M Gwinn gw...@raytheon.com wrote:
I would propose that ITU is using continuity and uniformity in their
mathematical definitions, implying that the intent is that at least in
definitional theory, UTC be mathematically continuous with all its
derivatives
On Wed, 20 Mar 2013 20:16:49 -0700, Rob Seaman wrote:
On Mar 20, 2013, at 6:02 PM, Joseph M Gwinn gw...@raytheon.com wrote:
I would propose that ITU is using continuity and uniformity in their
mathematical definitions, implying that the intent is that at least
in definitional theory, UTC be
So I gotta ask.
What's the problem with doing radar and other similar things in GPS time
and keeping human time in UTC, with leap seconds?
I mean, sure, years ago timestamps were YYMMDDHHMMSS and those
eventually got bigger, and eventually folks started noticing that things
really got
10 matches
Mail list logo
