Re: Leap seconds - UK opposes change

[Brooke Clarke]

Hi Mike: The problem I see is a Y2K type of thing.  With the current leap seconds system some adjustment needs to be made every 2 or 3 years on average and so those who need to make the leap second adjustment work in their software have some practice.  But, like the Y2K problem, if you have some event that occurs only once in some number of generations then when it occurs there's no one who has any experience with it and so it becomes a very big thing.  There are other time scales that don't have leap seconds like TAI and GPS that are readily available for scientific users who need them. Of course a precision sundial would no longer work over long periods of time. Have Fun, Brooke Clarke, N6GCE -- w/Java http://www.PRC68.com w/o Java http://www.pacificsites.com/~brooke/PRC68COM.shtml http://www.precisionclock.com Mike Cowham wrote: Dear Shadow Watchers,     I have been following recent correspondence on the list about the Leap Second issue.  If we put this into perspective it seems that we only insert one or two in any year and, if we abandon them we will not correct things until the error gets to one hour.  I make this something like 2000 years!  Why are WE worrying about the error?  They may have abandoned time completely by then or we could be using 'Intergalactic Time'.      I think that as far as we are concerned we should just go with the idea of no leap seconds and let future generations worry about the consequences.  It certainly will not be noticed on sundials for several generations.       I have just been reading John Smith's book 'Horological Disquisitions' of 1694, in which he advocates changing our clocks ten times over the course of the year (on specific dates) to keep them within 3m 45s of Solar Time.  This Leap Second thing is a similar situation.   Regards, Mike Cowham Cambridge UK.