On 02/08/2011 14:39, Rob Seaman wrote:
Warner Losh wrote:

How would it be any different than today?  Every few hundred years, the 
government moves the time zone.  Heck, they do that now every few years anyway. 
 Each government would be able to move it as they saw fit, or follow other 
government's leads.  If the US move and Canada doesn't, then what's the harm?
A) It would be taking what is currently a doubly indirect pointer and removing 
the layer in the middle.  Dereferencing (converting to UTC) would no longer 
return a timescale stationary with respect to the synodic day.  A robust system 
with innumerable connections across interfaces and stakeholders worldwide would 
be made brittle.

I don't see why it wouldn't. If you really need synodic day, DUT1 tables would give that. Most people want intervals or "do this when the clock on the wall (not the sun) says 3 o'clock." But these problems are well understood in a world where 2am might not exist on the clock on the wall.

B) Detailed expert knowledge would become necessary to answer even simple questions of 
comparing both clock intervals and Earth orientation questions either in a single place 
or across epochs and locations.  "What year did Queensland shift from NEW-UTC+10h to 
NEW-UTC+10h30m?  No, no!  The second time?"

We have that today. Tell me, what time is it in Indiana? And how has that changed over the past 20 years? Indiana used to follow DST, then it didn't, then it shifted from one timezone to another. Oh, wait, only some counties did this. Even the olson database won't give you all the answers, but it will give you many of them.

C) As pointed out on numerous occasions in the past, these kaleidoscopic 
timezones would accelerate quadratically just like leap seconds.

This problem isn't solved by this method either.  True.
D) It is asserted that interval timekeeping is hard to do.  This would make it 
orders of magnitude more difficult for many classes of use cases.  It ain't all 
about surfing the current instant into a future so bright we have to wear 
shades.  (And I'm skeptical that sacrificing the UTC baby to the dingo on the 
beach really improves the surfing anyway.)

Given the yearly changes to the timezones today, I'm skeptical about believing that adding a few dozen more every few hundred years would be a huge burden.

Warner
I don't disagree that there's no plan.
Another point of consensus!

Rob


_______________________________________________
LEAPSECS mailing list
[email protected]
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs




_______________________________________________
LEAPSECS mailing list
[email protected]
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs

Reply via email to