On 01/07/2011 15:34, Finkleman, Dave wrote:
There is no IAU support for the proposal to eliminate the leap second.
On the other hand, there is just not consensus one way or the other.
However, perceived IAU support was cited at the SG7 meeting in Geneva.
That misconception has been corrected, as reported from credible and
trustworthy sources. For what it's worth.
There seems to be consensus that there are problems. As is painfully
obvious, I am a newcomer. Therefore, I ask if there has even been a
meeting/working group/etc. to address issues with UTC as opposed to
definitions and resolutions about what UTC should or should not be?
There was a conference at Torino Italy in 2003 which did this. There
were a number of presentations on the different problems that leap
seconds cause, different "state of the art" technology assessments of
the earth's rotation etc.
The most interesting one was that the then state of the art was that
DUT1 could be predicted out 4 years and leap seconds could be schedule
2-3 years in advanced given the uncertainty bands at different time
scales forward into the future.
There's also an excellent writeup on this great topic that everyone
should read at http://www.ucolick.org/~sla/leapsecs/onlinebib.html
<http://www.ucolick.org/%7Esla/leapsecs/onlinebib.html> that has a link
to the Torino proceedings of the conference in 2003 (2004-02-14 seems to
be the date they were posted.
Warner
_______________________________________________
LEAPSECS mailing list
[email protected]
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
