Daniel R. Tobias wrote:
It's a few seconds off from TAI, isn't it? It was synchronized to
UTC in 1980 (I think),
Yes. The epoch for GPS time is 1980-01-06T00:00:00 UTC, which is
1980-01-06T00:00:00 GPS time. Not having leap seconds, it effectively
tracks TAI, with the equation
Brian Garrett wrote:
Besides, the English term leap second is a misnomer--a leap year is
a year with an extra day in it (and the inserted day is *not* called a leap
day)
Actually it *is* called a leap day. It is the leap year terminology
that is the odd one out.
-zefram
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Zefram writes:
Would have been nice. Actually, since the only real significance of
GPS time is that it's part of the signal format, they could just as
well have picked an unconventional but space-efficient encoding (say,
32-bit count of seconds, wrapping every 4
On Tue, 2 Jan 2007, Rob Seaman wrote:
Daniel R. Tobias replies to Poul-Henning Kamp:
Has anybody calculated how much energy is required to change
the Earths rotation fast enough to make this rule relevant ?
Superman could do it. Or perhaps he could nudge the Earth's rotation
just
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Peter Bunclark writes:
Without the Moon, the Earth could nod through large angles, lying on
its side or perhaps even rotating retrograde every few million
years. Try making sense of timekeeping under such circumstances.
You mean like taking a sequence of atomic
On Tue, 2 Jan 2007, Steve Allen wrote:
And, yes, explaining all this is very hard. It's not obvious to the
geek that the political and funding realities are more real than the
underlying physics, but that's the way the world works.
I've been reading The Measurement of Time by Audoin and
On Wed, 3 Jan 2007, Magnus Danielson wrote:
Assuming you have corrected for another gravitational field, yes. The
current SI second indirectly assumes a certain gravitational force, we
is assumed to be at sea level whatever level that is.
Wrong. The SI second is independent of your reference
From: Tony Finch [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [LEAPSECS] Introduction of long term scheduling
Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2007 17:38:35 +
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, 3 Jan 2007, Magnus Danielson wrote:
Assuming you have corrected for another gravitational field, yes. The
current SI
The time APIs that I am familiar with represent time as an interval based
on a fixed implicit epoch. To reset a clock that is wrong, its couner
value must be set to the correct value. This implies that the system's
real time clock and interval timer must be separate, so that processes
depending on
Tony Finch wrote:
Are there any APIs which have an explicit variable epoch, and which reset
the clock by adjusting its epoch instead of its counter? This would
eliminate the need for seperate interval and real-time clocks.
Interval clock and real-time clock remain conceptually distinct. If you
10 matches
Mail list logo
