> Isn't the limit on DUTC 0.9s? So you can't have a leap second at the end > of the month when | UT1 - UTC | < 0.1
Hi Tony, Right, for LSEM to work, you'd have to extend the DUT1 limit a bit beyond 0.9s. Historically, DUT1 has changed from 0.1s to 0.5s to 0.7s to 0.9s, so I doubt 1.1s or 2.0s would be the showstopper. /tvb ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tony Finch" <[email protected]> To: "Tom Van Baak" <[email protected]>; "Leap Second Discussion List" <[email protected]> Cc: "Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement" <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, July 22, 2016 3:18 AM Subject: Re: [LEAPSECS] [time-nuts] Leap second to be introduced at midnight UTC December 31 this year > Tom Van Baak <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > Does your proposal allow for a Zero leap second >> >> Nope, LSEM avoids the zero leap second situation. That's the idea: to >> always have a leap second. Either an add or a delete, at the end of >> every month. The beauty is that it wouldn't violate how UTC is already >> defined. > > Isn't the limit on DUTC 0.9s? So you can't have a leap second at the end > of the month when | UT1 - UTC | < 0.1 > > Tony. > -- > f.anthony.n.finch <[email protected]> http://dotat.at/ - I xn--zr8h punycode > Fisher, German Bight: Variable, mainly north, 3 or 4. Slight. Thundery > showers, fog patches in east. Moderate or good, occasionally very poor in > east. _______________________________________________ LEAPSECS mailing list [email protected] https://pairlist6.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
