To codify existing practice. We don't use GMT any more, we use UTC. It
isn't even clear that with the closing of Greenwich observatory if GMT
even exits.
I didn't say GMT, I said mean solar time.
I know you didn't say GMT, but that's what GMT is, and our laws
currently don't correspond to what we do. I don't know about you, but
that's a bad idea in my view.
> Practice and statutes worldwide have identified civil time
with mean solar time since the eighteenth century.
I disagree with this. Current practice (but not statue) identify civil
time with UTC. You may wish to argue that it shouldn't, but that's a
different argument.
This is the case
because it is the only logical choice for a civilization located on the
surface of a planet (orbiting a single star anyway, but the "Rare Earth"
hypothesis likely takes care of that).
False. It is *a* logical choice, there are other possible logical choices.
Bzzzt! See above.
That is very rude. You aren't a game show host with the ability to
determine the correct answer.
If that were the intent, one might have expected some enthusiastic
booster of rational timekeeping to mention the fact of these upcoming
statutory improvements to online communities of similar enthusiasts like
leapsecs, ntp, or time-nuts.
Why should they? leapsecs is a bunch of people with no power talking
about how to bell the cat. You severely overestimate the influence of
leapsecs, or those other mailing lists.
With zero irony, let me say that if this is some classified DOD chain of
reasoning that this agnostic for one sincerely prays that you know what
the hell to do about DUT1.
Well, one of the reasons you don't want DUT1 to expand in size is due to
the installed base that would break. Have you ever considered that DoD
might have a larger installed base of things that would break if
existing practices changed?
_______________________________________________
LEAPSECS mailing list
[email protected]
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
