Re: what should a time standard encompass?

2003-01-27 Thread Rob Seaman
to the UTC standard. If there is an actual proposal to go with this no new leap second notion, let's hear it - hopefully it will be better conceived than the surveys that have been so narrowly worded and disseminated. Folks, this isn't just some obscure technical question. Rob Seaman National Optical

Re: What problems do leap seconds *really* create?

2003-01-29 Thread Rob Seaman
are discussed very prominently in a very short document. Rob Seaman National Optical Astronomy Observatory

Re: NASA GMT vs UTC

2003-02-16 Thread Rob Seaman
potentially incur huge costs for remediation of, as yet, completely unquantified risks. Rob Seaman National Optical Astronomy Observatory

Re: Torino meeting and implications of international time UT1

2003-06-06 Thread Rob Seaman
a conclusion that Leap seconds must die! that was already formed prior to Y2K. Rob Seaman National Optical Astronomy Observatory

Re: more media coverage

2003-07-23 Thread Rob Seaman
about leap seconds. Many will - and the number of users and their applications (meaning people, their jobs and what they do in their private lives) who do care will grow as civil time and UT1/GMT diverge. Y2K had a razor sharp deadline. L2K (or L3K?) is a timebomb with a slow burning fuse. Rob

Re: more media coverage

2003-07-23 Thread Rob Seaman
- and definitely should not be avoided due to the potential for worldwide Y2K-like disasters. Go ahead, cut the Gordian knot. Rob Seaman National Optical Astronomy Observatory

two world clocks

2005-01-20 Thread Rob Seaman
discussions among biased insiders. It ain't your clock - it's *our* clock. Rob Seaman National Optical Astronomy Observatory

Re: two world clocks

2005-01-20 Thread Rob Seaman
changes are needed is no surprise (see http://iraf.noao.edu/~seaman/leap for my analysis of the situation), but what the hell is the hurry? Rob Seaman National Optical Astronomy Observatory

Re: two world clocks

2005-01-20 Thread Rob Seaman
Time (of whatever flavor). Universal Time was to be reserved for timescales synchronized to the rotation of the Earth. One might wonder at the reluctance of proponents to follow through on this easily comprehended consensus. Rob Seaman National Optical Astronomy Observatory

our customers' needs

2005-01-26 Thread Rob Seaman
there be for truncating the discovery process for uncovering similar requirements placed on civil time by the great religions of the world before making a large change in the definition of civil time? Rob Seaman National Optical Astronomy Observatory

Re: GMT - UTC in Australia

2005-02-23 Thread Rob Seaman
this was the case or not, the wording of the quoted article makes it clear that UTC is being sold to everyday Australians in its original sense of being a continuing approximation to GMT: UTC is adjusted to remain consistent with GMT using leap seconds every 18 months. Rob Seaman National Optical

Re: GMT - UTC in Australia

2005-02-24 Thread Rob Seaman
: Call the new system of time resulting from the leap hour proposal International Time, TI for short. Walk through the front door of the world's parliaments and legislatures and attempt to sell TI as a high priority proposal. What would be the likely response? Rob Seaman National Optical Astronomy

Re: GMT - UTC in Australia

2005-02-24 Thread Rob Seaman
of Universal Time. UTC is a useful approximation to GMT. Keep it that way and call any new system of civil time that might win the day something else. It is the height of intellectual dishonesty to do otherwise. Rob Seaman National Optical Astronomy Observatory

new beginning

2005-08-03 Thread Rob Seaman
be disregarded - I will. Rob Seaman National Optical Astronomy Observatory

Re: Precise time over time

2005-08-10 Thread Rob Seaman
unilaterally changing a 120 year-old international standard. Duck and cover! Rob Seaman National Optical Astronomy Observatory

Re: Precise time over time

2005-08-11 Thread Rob Seaman
discussions) simply regroup, withdraw the current silly proposal and define a process to patiently and prudently reach a consensus. It will take time to make time - better. Rob Seaman National Optical Astronomy Observatory

Re: Precise time over time

2005-08-11 Thread Rob Seaman
[presumably manned by Pee Wee Herman's robot from Star Tours] a real horror show. And as you surely now see, little Sally, all of these robotical slaughterhouse shenanigans are like totally the fault of those dastardly leap seconds... Rob Seaman National Optical Astronomy Observatory

Re: Precise time over time

2005-08-12 Thread Rob Seaman
- it is infrastructure that we must include in our planning. Rob Seaman National Optical Astronomy Observatory

Re: Precise time over time

2005-08-12 Thread Rob Seaman
are in this situation. Any civil time proposal that does not include an analysis of instrumentalities is void of meaning. Rob Seaman National Optical Astronomy Observatory

decision tree for civil time

2005-08-13 Thread Rob Seaman
evident. Please help me to remove these and to avoid adding any of your own. The structure is also too flat - categories might benefit from hierarchical nesting. Rob Seaman National Optical Astronomy Observatory

Re: Consensus rather than compromise

2005-08-29 Thread Rob Seaman
to convince the politicians to vote against it? We'd have more luck legislating against the transfer of angular momentum from the Earth to the Moon... Rob Seaman National Optical Astronomy Observatory

Re: Consensus rather than compromise

2005-08-29 Thread Rob Seaman
to the mean solar day length. (And I'm doubtful that any of us would want to live on a planet or in a society for which this assertion was false :-) With no sense of irony - thanks for the excellent discussion. Rob Seaman National Optical Astronomy Observatory

Re: Consensus rather than compromise

2005-08-30 Thread Rob Seaman
in the previous message. Rob Seaman National Optical Astronomy Observatory

Re: Consensus rather than compromise

2005-08-31 Thread Rob Seaman
. It isn't sufficient for any of us simply to claim that our own pet proposal has no negative ramifications and to leave it at that. Rob Seaman National Optical Astronomy Observatory

Re: Consensus rather than compromise

2005-09-01 Thread Rob Seaman
and Calcutta, wish to be consulted and advised? Rob Seaman National Optical Astronomy Observatory

Comments on Civil Time decision tree

2005-09-23 Thread Rob Seaman
and hide the effect for most purposes (ignoring the gawdawful expense to astronomy), but is cheating really what the precision timing community wants to do? It may be annoying that Mother Earth spins irregularly, but spin she most certainly does. Rob Seaman National Optical Astronomy Observatory

Re: Comments on Civil Time decision tree

2005-09-26 Thread Rob Seaman
would reject the current proposal if anybody had thought to ask them about it. Rob Seaman National Optical Astronomy Observatory

Re: Comments on Civil Time decision tree

2005-09-26 Thread Rob Seaman
On Sep 26, 2005, at 11:56 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:Again: merely trying to point out that the "only one timescale" argument Rob pushes doesn't work.This misrepresents my position.  There are clearly many time scales for many purposes.  One of those purposes is something that might be referred

Re: Comments on Civil Time decision tree

2005-09-27 Thread Rob Seaman
Perhaps I might expand on some of Bill Thompson's statements in the context of the great convenience factor of using the current UTC standard.The accuracy requirement for the delivery of UTC to the instruments is +/- 0.410 seconds.High quality, cutting edge science doesn't always require

Re: Be thankful for John Flamstead

2005-11-10 Thread Rob Seaman
of astronomy professor, Fr. Edward Jenkins, was fond of the fourth Astronomer Royal, Nathaniel Bliss. He recalled (often) having seen a beer mug with the gent's face on it and the motto, This is Bliss, if bliss on Earth there be. Rob Seaman National Optical Astronomy Observatory

Re: a system that fails spectacularly

2005-12-07 Thread Rob Seaman
On Dec 6, 2005, at 3:27 PM, Steve Allen wrote:Finally we begin to see folks stand up and identify their systems as having abysmally failed to implement the UTC standard. http://www.acrelectronics.com/alerts/leap.htmEven more remarkably, they proudly proclaim: "The quality systems of this

Re: a system that fails spectacularly

2005-12-07 Thread Rob Seaman
. Rob Seaman National Optical Astronomy Observatory

Re: Lighter Evenings (Experiment) Bill [HL]

2005-12-19 Thread Rob Seaman
and oranges, we're talking about apples and the rate of change of qumquats. In fact, it is remarkable that the existence of a significant acceleration (second derivative or quadratic effect) in the need for leap seconds is being asserted as a bogus justification for not issuing leap seconds at all. Rob

Re: Schreiver AFB warns about leapsec

2005-12-20 Thread Rob Seaman
On Dec 20, 2005, at 1:30 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:There is an interesting PowerPoint (sigh...) at Schriever AFB's GPS support center:https://www.schriever.af.mil/GpsSupportCenter/archive/advisory/Leap_Second_Event.pptAgreed.  Very interesting.They clearly know what the problem with leap seconds

Re: Schreiver AFB warns about leapsec

2005-12-20 Thread Rob Seaman
, but this occurs only something like 36% of the time. Would greatly appreciate knowledgeable comments from list members in Japan or Australia. This scheduling was a conscious design choice. I'm asserting it may not have been the right choice. Rob Seaman National Optical Astronomy Observatory

went pretty dang smoothly at this end

2005-12-31 Thread Rob Seaman
problem (and lack thereof) reports to me. Will comment further when these are available. Rob Seaman National Optical Astronomy Observatory

Re: Leap Second Countdown Clock

2005-12-31 Thread Rob Seaman
. Rob Seaman National Optical Astronomy Observatory

Re: Longer leap second notice, was: Where the responsibility lies

2006-01-03 Thread Rob Seaman
be some interesting hay to be made by generalizing our definition of a clock to include quasi-periodic phenomena more complicated than a once-per-second delta function. Would give us some reason to explore the Fourier domain if nothing else. Rob Seaman National Optical Astronomy Observatory

Fwd: [LEAPSECS] Longer leap second notice

2006-01-04 Thread Rob Seaman
(for once). (Some might consider me a software professional as well - am not particularly annoyed if you do not.) Would be delighted to hear more about your leap second infrastructure. Rob Seaman National Optical Astronomy Observatory

Re: The real problem with leap seconds

2006-01-07 Thread Rob Seaman
Hi Ed, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: What a weird concept... Why not go the full distance and define a timescale for each particular kind of time-piece: and give each of them their own unique way of coping with leapseconds ? Ignoring the ridiculous parody - no, it's not a weird

Re: The opportunity of leap seconds

2006-01-07 Thread Rob Seaman
On Jan 7, 2006, at 11:37 AM, John Cowan wrote:Whether we choose to bleed off the daily accumulating milliseconds one second or 3600 at a time, bleed them we must...and even people who loathe the very notion of leap seconds admit this. NO, I DON'T ADMIT THAT.  On the contrary, I deny it, flatly,

Re: predicting leap seconds

2006-01-08 Thread Rob Seaman
On Jan 7, 2006, at 11:01 PM, M. Warner Losh wrote: This would phase in the predictive timeline for leap second insertions, and would also give the IERS control to end the experiment if the time horizons exceeded their ability to predict with confidence. it would also be completely within the

Re: The opportunity of leap seconds

2006-01-08 Thread Rob Seaman
On Jan 8, 2006, at 4:41 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: It sounds to me like BIPM ought to make an Internet service available which will deliver UT1 to astronomers in a timely fashion ? Not sure BIPM is necessarily the appropriate agent, but otherwise agree 100%. Perhaps we should seek other

Re: The real problem with leap seconds

2006-01-08 Thread Rob Seaman
On Jan 8, 2006, at 5:38 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: As I understood it, it was mainly that TAI is a post-factum postal timescale. One is left pondering the fact that UTC is now (and would remain under any changes I've heard suggested) a time scale based on TAI. What magic makes one

interoperability

2006-01-08 Thread Rob Seaman
. Time zones (and the prime meridian?) would race more-and-more rapidly around the globe. Perhaps I've misunderstood, but this line of reasoning doesn't appear to resolve anything. Rob Seaman National Optical Astronomy Observatory

Re: interoperability

2006-01-08 Thread Rob Seaman
On Jan 8, 2006, at 4:04 PM, Tom Van Baak wrote: You cannot divide timekeeping, time dissemination, into neat stages. Again. My point is strengthened. This being the case, a requirement on one flavor of time transfers to others. We will not solve the problem of creeping complexity and

Re: interoperability

2006-01-08 Thread Rob Seaman
On Jan 9, 2006, at 12:03 AM, John Cowan wrote: Each locality decides when and how to adjust both its offset from TAI and its seasonal transition function (if any), just as it does today. Not just as today, see intervening messages. What we abandon is a universal time tightly synchronized to

Re: interoperability

2006-01-09 Thread Rob Seaman
On Jan 9, 2006, at 12:06 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: You yourself defined stage one as TAI with some constant offset yourself, you can't change definition in the middle of the discussion. I was attempting to describe your position. In point of fact, I agree with Tom Van Baak: You cannot

Re: interoperability

2006-01-09 Thread Rob Seaman
On Jan 9, 2006, at 12:23 AM, John Cowan wrote: This is like the day is light and night is dark statement: there is, at any given location, one and only one sunrise per (solar) day, no matter what clocks say. Communication prospers when people's clear meaning is not subjugated to petty

Re: interoperability

2006-01-09 Thread Rob Seaman
On Jan 9, 2006, at 1:01 AM, Clive D.W. Feather wrote: We go through such discontinuities twice a year in most years. Only the uninteresting daylight saving jumps. UTC remains without discontinuities above the level of a leap second. If UTC weren't equivalent to what I call civil time, the

Re: interoperability

2006-01-09 Thread Rob Seaman
On Jan 9, 2006, at 1:22 AM, Clive D.W. Feather wrote: At some point, probably around the time that we're seeing an hourly shift every year, people are going to have to divorce second from day, or at least re-negotiate the terms of engagement. By what magic do we believe the issues involved

Re: MJD and leap seconds

2006-01-10 Thread Rob Seaman
On Jan 10, 2006, at 9:17 AM, Peter Bunclark wrote:On Tue, 10 Jan 2006, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Peter Bunclark writes: Good grief.  MJD is used widely in astronomy, for example in variablility studies where you want a real number to represent time rather than deal with

War of the Worlds

2006-01-11 Thread Rob Seaman
I see Steve Allen has already supplied a thorough answer. Interested individuals might also scrounge through the list archives (http:// rom.usno.navy.mil/archives/leapsecs.html) since the topic has come up before. In fact, Demetrios Matsakis speculated on solar system wide timescales even

Monsters from the id

2006-01-11 Thread Rob Seaman
What now, Dr. Moebius?                      Prepare your minds for a new scale...                    of physical scientific values, gentlemen.Mark Calabretta takes the lazy man's way out and appeals to facts: Here in a topology-free way is what the axis labels of my graph looklike during

Re: The real problem with leap seconds

2006-01-13 Thread Rob Seaman
I'm glad to see such active traffic on the list - particularly discussions such as this that are wrestling with fundamental concepts. On 2006-01-13, Mark Calabretta wrote: The point is that UTC is simply a representation of TAI. On Jan 13, 2006, at 4:17 AM, Michael Deckers wrote: I

Re: The real problem with leap seconds

2006-01-13 Thread Rob Seaman
On Jan 13, 2006, at 8:05 AM, Ed Davies wrote: MJD 27123.5 means 12:00:00 on day 27123 if it's not a leap second day, but what does it mean on a day with a positive leap second? 12:00:00.5? And we're back to the point in question. The precise issue is the definition of the concept of a day.

Re: Report of Leap Second Problem with GPS Data

2006-01-14 Thread Rob Seaman
that some other data products were unaffected? So, the issue has been resolved - would likely have been resolved sooner if a leap second had occurred earlier - and is no longer directly pertinent to a discussion of future leap seconds? Well done, Geoscience Australia! Rob Seaman NOAO

Re: Problems with GLONASS Raw Receiver Data at Start of New Year

2006-01-14 Thread Rob Seaman
-round and the media circus would have moved on. Rob Seaman NOAO

Risks of change to UTC

2006-01-16 Thread Rob Seaman
that many deployed systems (of whatever nature) are naively configured. Is this likely to change overnight? Rob Seaman NOAO

Re: Internet-Draft on UTC-SLS

2006-01-19 Thread Rob Seaman
-SLS is intended to serve all needs. Rather, we've heard the opposite. Suspect I'm not alone in being suspicious of any overreaching solution proffered for all timekeeping situations - sounds like the definition of a kludge. Rob Seaman NOAO

Re: Internet-Draft on UTC-SLS

2006-01-19 Thread Rob Seaman
On Jan 19, 2006, at 10:02 AM, Rob Seaman wrote: How delightful! A discussion about the design merits of actual competing technical proposals! Apologies for failing to credit the quotes from Poul-Henning Kamp.

Re: Risks of change to UTC

2006-01-21 Thread Rob Seaman
to convert shipboard apparent time to local mean time. Subtraction does the rest. Rob Seaman NOAO

Re: Risks of change to UTC

2006-01-21 Thread Rob Seaman
is the Russian Global Navigation Satelllite System :-) In any event, one suspects that the Russians (or the FSU, even more so) would object to its being characterized as a GPS backup. Rob Seaman NOAO

Re: Risks of change to UTC

2006-01-21 Thread Rob Seaman
for either scientists or sailors. Whether we're also selfish is immaterial. Rob Seaman NOAO

Re: the tail wags the dog

2006-01-24 Thread Rob Seaman
On Jan 24, 2006, at 12:50 AM, Peter Bunclark wrote: I don't think Rob meant the above to be a complete course on navigation! ...although as a fan of Patrick O'Brian I am qualified not only to teach navigation, but also the violin and Catalan. You should see me in a Bear costume. Good

Re: the tail wags the dog

2006-01-24 Thread Rob Seaman
On Jan 24, 2006, at 8:06 AM, Ed Davies wrote: James Maynard wrote: The problem is not that the SI second is not based on a natural phenonemon (it is), but that the periods of the various natural phenonema (rotations of the earth about its axis revolutions of the earth about the sun,

Re: the tail wags the dog

2006-01-24 Thread Rob Seaman
On Jan 24, 2006, at 7:21 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:I think the crucial insight here is that geophysics makes (comparatively) lousy clocksThe crucial insight is that the Earth is not a clock at all, but rather the thing being timed.and we should stop using rotating bodies of geophysics for 

worthy challenges

2006-01-24 Thread Rob Seaman
Ed Davies wrote:By "rubber seconds" you, presumably, mean non-SI seconds.  What do you mean by "rubber days"?  I'd guess you mean days which are divided into SI seconds but not necessarily 86 400 of them.Yes.  See for instance:

The nature of risk

2006-01-25 Thread Rob Seaman
are asserted to be a risk. Does their lack present fewer risks? Prove it. Rob Seaman NOAO

Re: The nature of risk

2006-01-25 Thread Rob Seaman
Leap seconds are asserted to be a risk. Does their lack present fewer risks? Prove it. No, you prove it. Such rhetorical devices are designed to divide and separate, No, my rhetoric really isn't designed for that purpose. And even if it were so - how does that possibly undermine the idea

Re: Comparing Time Scales

2006-02-04 Thread Rob Seaman
/4800) aren't even denumerable with the length of our week. Why then is a requirement that one minute out of 800,000 accommodate one extra (or one fewer) second seen to be such an imposition? Especially when anybody who does find it so can simply choose to use TAI instead? Eppur si muove! Rob

Re: An immodest proposal

2006-02-14 Thread Rob Seaman
On Feb 14, 2006, at 12:50 PM, Markus Kuhn wrote: You can, of course, define, publish, implement, and promote a new version (4?) of NTP that can also diseminate TAI, EOPs, leap-second tables, and other good things. I'm all for it. But why are you for it? Before investing large amounts of time

Re: An immodest proposal

2006-02-14 Thread Rob Seaman
On Feb 14, 2006, at 2:28 PM, M. Warner Losh wrote:UTC time stamps in NTP are ambiguous.  TAI ones are not.Requirements should be kept separate from implementation.  Whatever the underlying timescale, certain external global requirements apply.  Whether NTP or some other implementation properly

Re: Ambiguous NTP timestamps near leap second

2006-02-16 Thread Rob Seaman
On Feb 16, 2006, at 2:06 PM, Markus Kuhn wrote: While there is a 24:00:00, there is certainly *no* 24:00:00.0001. That would be 00:00:00.0001 instead. Says who? Didn't we just burn a lot of calories discussing whether UTC was a real number or a continuous function? Time does

Re: Ambiguous NTP timestamps near leap second

2006-02-16 Thread Rob Seaman
On Feb 16, 2006, at 4:46 PM, Warner Losh wrote:UTC rules state that the time sequence should be23:59:59.7523:59:60.023:59:60.2523:59:60.5023:59:60.7500:00:00.:00:00.25Well, no.  ITU-R-TF.460-4 says nothing whatsoever about the representation of time using sexigesimal notation: "2.2 A

Re: 24:00 versus 00:00

2006-02-17 Thread Rob Seaman
window around midnight - say, 23:59-00:01, or 2 out of 1440 minutes per day. It should be even easier for NTP and other UTC transport mechanisms to avoid 2 minutes out of 365+ days. This isn't the solution to every challenge facing civil time - but it sure simplifies the search space. Rob Seaman

Re: 1884 IMC online

2006-02-20 Thread Rob Seaman
On Feb 19, 2006, at 1:35 PM, Steve Allen wrote:A few years ago Joseph S. Myers of Cambridge University went through the trouble of scanning a copy of the proceedings of the 1884 International Meridian Conference, and I put the TIFFs online http://www.ucolick.org/~sla/leapsecs/scans-meridian.htmlI

Re: 24:00 versus 00:00

2006-02-27 Thread Rob Seaman
On Feb 17, 2006, at 12:30 PM, Markus Kuhn wrote: Clive D.W. Feather wrote on 2006-02-17 05:58 UTC: However, London Underground does print 24:00 on a ticket issued at midnight, and in fact continues up to 27:30 (such tickets count as being issued on the previous day for validity purposes, and

Re: ideas for new UTC rules

2006-04-14 Thread Rob Seaman
On Apr 13, 2006, at 10:41 PM, Steve Allen wrote:Today is one of the four days in the year when Newcomb's_expression_ for the equation of time has a value of zeroand it was Samuel Beckett's hundredth birthday.  Leap second as Godot: ESTRAGON: And if he doesn't come?

Re: ideas for new UTC rules

2006-04-15 Thread Rob Seaman
Only hours ago did I learn of the recent problems with D-Link routers. Remarkable! Just imagine the logical disconnect at the product development meetings. The marketing folks emphasizing the highly desirable feature of NTP compliance and the tech folks tossing a list of 50 servers into the

Re: extracting leap second schedule

2006-05-30 Thread Rob Seaman
-utc.dat will always be in the future. Non-amusingly, in the alternate no-time-of-day universe, this never becomes a non-issue for recovering the orientation of Earth-2. Rob Seaman National Optical Astronomy Observatory

Re: Precision vs. resolution

2006-05-30 Thread Rob Seaman
On May 24, 2006, at 7:25 AM, John Cowan wrote: Can someone lay out for me exactly what the difference is between clock precision and clock resolution? Interesting question. Perhaps it is the distinction between addressability and physical pixels that one encounters on image displays and

Re: building consensus

2006-06-01 Thread Rob Seaman
Warner Losh objects:There are several doughty people here who happen to have that opinion, but they abide with us mortals outside the time lords' hushed inner sanctum.I have spent much time explaining why leap seconds cause real problems in real applications, only to be insulted like this.Sincere

Re: building consensus

2006-06-05 Thread Rob Seaman
On Jun 4, 2006, at 9:57 PM, M. Warner Losh wrote: leap days have a rule, while leap seconds are scheduled. A schedule and a rule are the same thing, just regarded from different historical perspectives. The leap day rule will most certainly have to accommodate scheduling changes over the

Re: building consensus

2006-06-05 Thread Rob Seaman
On Jun 5, 2006, at 8:45 AM, Warner Losh wrote:Leap days have an iron-clad rule that generates the schedule on whichthey happen.  Leap seconds have a committee that generates theschedule on which they happen.Further discussion in this thread calls into question the characterization of "iron-clad

Re: building consensus

2006-06-05 Thread Rob Seaman
On Jun 5, 2006, at 1:05 PM, John Cowan wrote: (ObOddity: It seems that in Israel, which is on UTC+3, the legal day begins at 1800 local time the day before. This simplifies the accommodation of Israeli and traditional Jewish law.) I wouldn't call this an oddity, but rather an interesting

Re: building consensus

2006-06-05 Thread Rob Seaman
On Jun 5, 2006, at 1:38 PM, John Cowan wrote: I found another spectacular illustration of how massive the difference between solar and legal time can be. Before 1845, the time in Manila, the Philippines, was the same as Acapulco, Mexico, a discrepancy of 9h16m from Manila solar time. This was

Re: building consensus

2006-06-05 Thread Rob Seaman
On Jun 5, 2006, at 2:47 PM, John Cowan wrote: I'm not sure what you mean by civil time in this context. I meant whatever we've meant in this forum for the past five years. For some people, civil time is synonymous with standard time; for others, it means the time shown by accurate clocks in

Re: building consensus

2006-06-05 Thread Rob Seaman
On Jun 5, 2006, at 4:05 PM, Rob Seaman wrote: On the other hand, all I've ever meant by the term civil time is that time that a well educated civilian sets her clock in order to agree with other civilians for civilian purposes. I should clarify this to mean the underlying internationalized

Re: building consensus

2006-06-06 Thread Rob Seaman
Ed Davies quoted:The Gregorian calendar provides a reference system consisting of a,potentially infinite, series of contiguous calendar years. Consecutivecalendar years are identified by sequentially assigned year numbers.A reference point is used which assigns the year  number 1875 to thecalendar

Re: building consensus

2006-06-07 Thread Rob Seaman
On Jun 7, 2006, at 2:01 AM, Clive D.W. Feather wrote: Actually, the evidence from experiments is that the natural sleep- wake cycle is about 27 hours long, but force-locked to the day-night cycle (it's easier to synchronise a longer free-running timer to a shorter external signal than

Re: building consensus

2006-06-07 Thread Rob Seaman
Tim Shepard replies: Also hard to imagine how one gracefully transitions from one to two sleep cycles a day. It is already the norm in some places: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siesta Thanks for the chuckle. One is then left wondering whether our far future, Clarkeian Against the Fall

Re: building consensus

2006-06-08 Thread Rob Seaman
Clive D.W. Feather wrote: March was the first month of the year; look at the derivation of September, for example. Makes the zero vs. one indexing question of C and FORTRAN programmers look sane. I've pointed people to the whole 7, 8, 9, 10 sequence from September to December on those

Re: building consensus

2006-06-08 Thread Rob Seaman
John Cowan wrote: In the cover story, it was used as a final defense against the Invaders and destroyed by them. In the true story, it was destroyed because it constituted a hazard, but I forget exactly how. Thanks! But not sure true story is the opposite of cover story, here :-) Both

Re: building consensus

2006-06-08 Thread Rob Seaman
On Jun 8, 2006, at 8:08 AM, Clive D.W. Feather wrote: Rob Seaman said: Thanks! But not sure true story is the opposite of cover story, here :-) I don't think John's referring to Against the Fall of Night versus The City and the Stars. Rather, at least in the latter, the official (cover

Re: independence day

2006-07-05 Thread Rob Seaman
John Cowan wrote: I regret to state that this remark appears to me no more than scaremongering. Merely hyperbole intended to make a point about the art of crafting fundamental standards. Obviously I failed to make that point :-) Why precisely, however, do you regret your inference? If my

Re: PT Barnum was right

2006-07-06 Thread Rob Seaman
Steve Allen wrote:In the news.google this week is a press release for a clock thatautomatically tracks leap seconds.Anybody volunteering to tell these guys that their product is about to be orphaned?  Sounds like a lawsuit in the making.  Would think the ITU lawyers would be interested in their

Re: PT Barnum was right

2006-07-06 Thread Rob Seaman
On Jul 6, 2006, at 12:46 PM, Brian Garrett wrote: I was told that the station delays their broadcast in order to enable on-the-spot editing of objectionable material. Surely the requirement is to permit review of *potentially* objectionable material. A time signal is no such thing and need

the case for created time

2006-07-18 Thread Rob Seaman
We have all been so utterly wrong!  The scales dropfrom my eyes (http://www.creation-answers.com):A theory of evolution for the creation of the solar systemseems less than satisfactory in regard that the Earth andMoon appear to generate interrelated time cycles.A prize (well, a beer when next we

trading amplitude for scheduling (was Re: [LEAPSECS] leap seconds in video art)

2006-08-03 Thread Rob Seaman
Brian Garrett wrote: the mini-lectures did imply that leap seconds compensate for secular deceleration of the earth rather than seasonally accumulated differences between UTC and UT1. To the extent that I understand the point you are aiming for, this statement conflates two issues: 1) that

  1   2   >