In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Tony Finch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
: On Thu, 27 Mar 2008, Steve Allen wrote:
: >
: > Upon further consideration, I'm not sure I agree. For the purposes of
: > satellite navigation there is not need for the terrestrial reference
: > frame to be tightly tied to the celestial reference frame. Achieving
: > accuracy of 1 meter certainly doesn't care about rapid changes of
: > earth orientation parameters with respect to the quasars, only with
: > respect to the satellites. So it could be argued that the need for
: > VLBI campaigns would become a scientific extravagance no longer
: > relevant to civil life.
:
: Is there enough coupling between Earth rotation and the orbiting
: satellites to make a difference between their reference frame and one
: derived from quasars?
I don't think so. Leapseconds are a an evil. If they are a good
evil, it comes at a high price. Evilness to keep DUT1 < 1s is all in
the eyes of the bolder. As someone who has been ill-treated by
leapseconds, I fail to see why they are necessary in a society that
accepts > 1hr deviation from solar mean time... Sure, they help keep
us in sync with the celestial motions, but at what price?
Warner
_______________________________________________
LEAPSECS mailing list
[email protected]
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
