John Cowan wrote:
[If TAI - 33 s were taken as the new basis for civil timescales, then]
It is UTC that would be eliminated as the basis for local time. It could
be maintained for such other purposes as anyone might have.
Yes, the IERS could maintain it as the timescale for a
Yes: there is an order on the set of values of timescales -
it is a basic property of spacetime models that one can distinguish
past and present, at least locally. Spacetime is a differentiable
4-dimensional manifold, its coordinate functions are usually two
times
On Thu 2006/01/12 02:36:44 CDT, John Cowan wrote
in a message to: LEAPSECS@ROM.USNO.NAVY.MIL
We already have that repeated time sequence and gap in much of the world,
and live with it. These repetitions would be no better and no worse;
when a gap is present, the local sovereignty can omit the
Rob Seaman scripsit:
And the point I'm making is that you can't shift timezones at will to
accomplish this without creating seams in legally realized time.
We already have seams in legally recognized time.
Just making the dark stay put would result in ambiguous
timekeeping. Daylight saving
