On Mon, 23 Jan 2006, John Cowan wrote:
> Rob Seaman scripsit:
> > that it can be reliably recovered from observations whenever and
> > wherever needed (once you are located with respect to a meridian, of
> > course).
>
> I don't understand this. You can't shoot the mean sun with a sextant,
> only
Rob Seaman scripsit:
> >The legal time in the US is the mean solar time at a given
> >meridian, as determined by the secretary of commerce
>
> ...and many may have seen Mr. Gutierrez shooting the sun with his
> sextant out on the Mall in front of the A&S Museum :-)
>
> With all the words that have
On Mon 2006-01-23T09:33:10 -0700, M. Warner Losh hath writ:
> (the term mean
> solar time isn't legally defined, but does have an accepted scientific
> meaning).
Would that it were so, but I don't believe it because I've read the
proceedings of the IAU general assemblies and related papers. I've
On Jan 23, 2006, at 9:33 AM, M. Warner Losh wrote:
The legal time in the US is the mean solar time at a given
meridian, as determined by the secretary of commerce
...and many may have seen Mr. Gutierrez shooting the sun with his
sextant out on the Mall in front of the A&S Museum :-)
With all
Tim Shepard wrote on 2006-01-23 16:20 UTC:
> Be careful. The goals of the folk on this mailing list and the goals
> of the wikipedia project are probably not aligned.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not
>
> In particular, note the section "Wikipedia is not a publishe
On Mon, Jan 23, 2006 at 11:20:45AM -0500, Tim Shepard wrote:
> Be careful. The goals of the folk on this mailing list and the goals
> of the wikipedia project are probably not aligned.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not
>
> In particular, note the section "Wikipedia
In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Steve Allen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
: The legal time of the US is (in many more words) GMT.
: The officials who are charged by congress with the task of providing
: time provide UTC.
The legal time in the US is the mean solar time at a given meridian
Be careful. The goals of the folk on this mailing list and the goals
of the wikipedia project are probably not aligned.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not
In particular, note the section "Wikipedia is not a publisher of
original thought".
It is certainly possible for
In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Neal McBurnett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
: > Rob Seaman wrote:
: > >>I hope we can all continue this discussion in a more positive manner.
:
: It is the nature of email lists to be good at stimulating discussion,
: and bad at generating clear resolution
Clive D.W. Feather scripsit:
> Why not? Greek and Latin, to name two, were spoken that long ago and are
> recognisable today.
Indeed, and they passed through a far tighter bottleneck than anything
likely today.
Not even the most diligently destructive barbarian can
extirpate the
On Mon 2006-01-23T14:02:01 +, Clive D.W. Feather hath writ:
> Steve Allen said:
> > The official time of the US for commerce and legal purposes is UTC(NIST).
> > The official time of the US DOD is UTC(USNO).
> The official time of the UK is GMT.
Please distinguish between official and legal.
On Mon, 23 Jan 2006, Clive D.W. Feather wrote:
>Steve Allen said:
>> The official time of the US for commerce and legal purposes is UTC(NIST).
>> The official time of the US DOD is UTC(USNO).
>> The official time of the Federal Republic of Germany is UTC(PTB).
>> etc.
>
>The official time of the U
On Mon 2006-01-23T11:08:29 +, David Malone hath writ:
> As far as I can see from my 1992 edition of the Explanatory Supplement
> to the Astronomical Almanac, UT1 and GMST were (defined?)
> the relationship seems to have been changed to ones documented in
> (Capitaine et al., 2000, Capitaine et
Steve Allen said:
> The official time of the US for commerce and legal purposes is UTC(NIST).
> The official time of the US DOD is UTC(USNO).
> The official time of the Federal Republic of Germany is UTC(PTB).
> etc.
The official time of the UK is GMT.
--
Clive D.W. Feather | Work: <[EMAIL PROT
M. Warner Losh said:
> 1500 years ago, no one spoke English. Chances are the people that
> deal with this problem in 1000 or 2000 years won't speak any language
> recognizable to anybody alive today.
Why not? Greek and Latin, to name two, were spoken that long ago and are
recognisable today.
And
> Professional and amateur astronomers are not the only ones who need good
> estimates of UT1.
I've been wondering about this for a bit. Do astronomers and
navigators actually want UT1 or do they want GMST? Since UT1 is
based on a mean sun, which I guess no one actually observs, it would
seem that
On Sun, 22 Jan 2006, Rob Seaman wrote:
> > I hope we can all continue this discussion in a more positive manner.
>
> I'm of the opinion that messages on this list (no matter how
> "tricky" :-) are always positive.
I personnally have 1 or 2 counter examples, but mailling lists
have for long greatl
> Rob Seaman wrote:
> >>I hope we can all continue this discussion in a more positive manner.
It is the nature of email lists to be good at stimulating discussion,
and bad at generating clear resolutions. Thus was the FAQ born. But
we have a more modern technology than FAQs, the wiki, which can
18 matches
Mail list logo
