On Jan 28, 2011, at 4:48 PM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> In message <[email protected]>, Rob Seaman writes:
>> On Jan 28, 2011, at 4:17 PM, Warner Losh wrote:
>>
>>> Sometimes I think we should define a second that's 1e-11 or so shorter so
>>> that the problems of leap seconds disappear into the noise for a generation
>>> or three, but I doubt that would fare any better than any of the other
>>> suggestions made...
>>
>> It's been ignored since I suggested it in 2001:
>
> You mean: We realized 30+ years ago that rubber-seconds are totally
> unworkable.
No, I mean that the discussion has nothing to do with SI seconds:
- The length-of-day on Earth has never been 86400 SI seconds long.
- There are two different kinds of timekeeping.
- It is the attempt to pretend otherwise that is causing the friction.
Rob
_______________________________________________
LEAPSECS mailing list
[email protected]
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
