On Tue 2014-01-14T10:48:33 +0000, Poul-Henning Kamp hath writ: > To everybody else but the scientists who tickled the atomic clocks, > leap seconds was an academic detail of no consequence.
Right. Most of the world had quartz crystal clocks off by seconds per month. The ephemerides simply tabulated UT for many phenomena. The IAU, CCIR, CCDS and CGPM approved UTC with statements effectively saying UTC is like GMT. Nobody was expressing any worry that a time scale where the duration of one second was defined differently and unrelated to the duration of one day might be a problem. They licked their wounds from the decade of battle, trumpted their compromise as the solution for all problems, and went on as though nothing signficant had changed. > UTC being Coordinated was a The Big Deal, and the *only* reason why > CCITT ever got involved in timescales: Telcos needed to schedule and > bill across national borders. In 1980 November the CCITT accepted UTC "as the time scale for all other telecommunications activities". In 2007 the BIPM contributed document 7A/51-E to the ITU-R WP7A meeting regarding Question ITU-R 236/7 saying please don't use TAI, we might even suppress it. Then in 2010 November ITU-T SG 15 recommended the use of PTP (IEEE 1588) in ITU-T Recommendation G.8265.1, an operational time scale based on TAI. These international agencies with multi-letter-acronym names are still not listening to each other about the nitty gritty details. -- Steve Allen <[email protected]> WGS-84 (GPS) UCO/Lick Observatory--ISB Natural Sciences II, Room 165 Lat +36.99855 1156 High Street Voice: +1 831 459 3046 Lng -122.06015 Santa Cruz, CA 95064 http://www.ucolick.org/~sla/ Hgt +250 m _______________________________________________ LEAPSECS mailing list [email protected] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
