Re: Monsters from the id

2006-01-17 Thread Mark Calabretta
On Mon 2006/01/16 00:40:28 CDT, John Cowan wrote in a message to: LEAPSECS@ROM.USNO.NAVY.MIL I realize the ALHP has severe problems with this, but I don't approve of the ALHP anyhow (save perhaps tactically, as explained). Agreement! But does anyone think that the leap hour proposal is anything

Re: Monsters from the id

2006-01-17 Thread Neal McBurnett
On Sat, Jan 14, 2006 at 02:09:20AM -0700, Rob Seaman wrote: On Jan 13, 2006, at 12:46 AM, John Cowan wrote: In the end, it will be impossible to maintain the notion that a solar day is 24h of 60m of 60s each: we wind up, IIRC, with the solar day and lunar month both at about

Re: Monsters from the id

2006-01-15 Thread Mark Calabretta
On Fri 2006/01/13 18:39:01 CDT, John Cowan wrote in a message to: LEAPSECS@ROM.USNO.NAVY.MIL The situation with the proposed leap hour is quite different. Given that AEST is defined as UTC+1000, and AEDT as UTC+1100, would someone care to speculate, in terms similar to the above, what will

Re: Monsters from the id

2006-01-15 Thread John Cowan
Mark Calabretta scripsit: If you go through the exercise trying to tie leap hours to DST, as I challenged, you will discover that it raises many questions that are not addressed by the leap hour proposal. I realize the ALHP has severe problems with this, but I don't approve of the ALHP anyhow

Re: Monsters from the id

2006-01-14 Thread Rob Seaman
On Jan 13, 2006, at 12:46 AM, John Cowan wrote: In the end, it will be impossible to maintain the notion that a solarday is 24h of 60m of 60s each: we wind up, IIRC, with the solar dayand lunar month both at about 47 current solar days. There's a lot of difference between what happens over a

Re: Monsters from the id

2006-01-13 Thread Tom Van Baak
It should be clear that the gaps and repeats are fictitious, especially if you think of AEST and AEDT as existing beyond the times when they are in legal use. Putting it in practical terms, suppose I have a traffic accident at 0230 on 2006/04/02, what time will the police officer write in

Re: Monsters from the id

2006-01-12 Thread Michael Deckers
John Cowan wrote: [If TAI - 33 s were taken as the new basis for civil timescales, then] It is UTC that would be eliminated as the basis for local time. It could be maintained for such other purposes as anyone might have. Yes, the IERS could maintain it as the timescale for a

Re: Monsters from the id

2006-01-12 Thread Mark Calabretta
On Thu 2006/01/12 02:36:44 CDT, John Cowan wrote in a message to: LEAPSECS@ROM.USNO.NAVY.MIL We already have that repeated time sequence and gap in much of the world, and live with it. These repetitions would be no better and no worse; when a gap is present, the local sovereignty can omit the

Re: Monsters from the id

2006-01-12 Thread Rob Seaman
On Jan 12, 2006, at 12:36 AM, John Cowan wrote:No one, at least not on this list, is arguing for an alignment of theabsurd leap hour proposal (henceforth ALHP) with DST changes.I went rummaging through the ITU proposal and back as far as Torino.  Found this comment from a LEAPSECS thread on 28

Re: Monsters from the id

2006-01-12 Thread John Cowan
Rob Seaman scripsit: I went rummaging through the ITU proposal and back as far as Torino. Found this comment from a LEAPSECS thread on 28 July 2003: At Torino the proponents of omitting leap seconds supposed that the governments of the world might handle this situation using leap hours

Re: Monsters from the id

2006-01-12 Thread John Cowan
Rob Seaman scripsit: And the point I'm making is that you can't shift timezones at will to accomplish this without creating seams in legally realized time. We already have seams in legally recognized time. Just making the dark stay put would result in ambiguous timekeeping. Daylight saving

Monsters from the id

2006-01-11 Thread Rob Seaman
What now, Dr. Moebius?                      Prepare your minds for a new scale...                    of physical scientific values, gentlemen.Mark Calabretta takes the lazy man's way out and appeals to facts: Here in a topology-free way is what the axis labels of my graph looklike during