On 10/31/2014 02:49 AM, Sanjeev Gupta wrote:

On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 7:01 AM, Harlan Stenn <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

    I'm still thinking the answer is "leave existing 'names' alone - if you
    want TAI use TAI. If you want UTC, use UTC.  If you want something new,
    call it something new."

    If people are using a defined name for a defined purpose and it works
    for them, leave it alone.  If people are using a defined name for a
    defined purpose and it does not work for them, this group needs to come
    up with a new name for the thing they think will solve their problems


+1

I understand the issue that "UTC" is a part of many laws and documents
that will be difficult to change, so it is easier to change the
definition of UTC.  But this still does not make it right.

As an extreme example, and more in jest, consider if a number of
legislatures enacted laws to make maths simpler, by declaring that the
"adjustments past the second decimal place to pi need not apply", and
hence "pi will be fixed at 3.14".  This will save lots of time and
effort, and help programmers and implementers make fewer mistakes.

Will we, because it is hard to get governments to make changes, say,
"OK, pi = 3.14, and any one (like Rob) who still wants the old figure
can look up the correction from IAU (but not call it pi)"?

I know this is an inexact analogy.

When it was realised that the it was easier to work with a value of
(Planck Constant / 2 pi), that (h-bar) was not renamed to by the Plank
Constant, it has a new name: Dirac Constant or Reduced Planck Constant.
We use the h-bar more often, but do not re-purpose the original name.

Give it a new name, please.  Independent of what the "fundamental unit" is.

TAI and UTC already exists, but the use of TAI has been actively discouraged. The trouble is that those that wants a TAI-like time-scale sometimes needs to comply to UTC needs, and for a number of reasons they have difficulty in using it, so they want to make UTC a TAI-timescale.

Cheers,
Magnus
_______________________________________________
LEAPSECS mailing list
[email protected]
https://pairlist6.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs

Reply via email to