nemo_outis writes: > It was specifically chosen, not because of its deep significance as a > 'universal physical constant', but specifically to make the 'new' > second very close to the old 'earth-rotation' second.
But not exact. Can't be: the rotation is not stable. I'm not advocating the elimination of leapseconds: just a cessation of the practice of treating them as if they were corrections of errors in the atomic clocks. Let the clocks run on TAI (and so record time stamps) and then look up and insert leapseconds as needed for display. -- John Hasler [email protected] Dancing Horse Hill Elmwood, WI USA _______________________________________________ questions mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
