Re: The opportunity of leap seconds

2006-01-09 Thread Peter Bunclark
On Sun, 8 Jan 2006, Tom Van Baak wrote: Peter, So where do these modern telescope get UT1? Do you or The last time I was involved personally was during my time as a support astronomer at the Isaac Newton Group on La Palma in the early nineties. We had a radio receiver which required upcoming

Re: The opportunity of leap seconds

2006-01-08 Thread Peter Bunclark
On Sat, 7 Jan 2006, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: What Astronomers use UTC for, in your own many times repeated words, is a convenient approximation of UT1, and consequently it follows that if instead of an approximation astronomers used the Real Thing, leap seconds could harmlessly be removed

Re: The opportunity of leap seconds

2006-01-08 Thread Steve Allen
On Sun 2006-01-08T12:41:21 +0100, Poul-Henning Kamp hath writ: It sounds to me like BIPM ought to make an Internet service available which will deliver UT1 to astronomers in a timely fashion ? That would have to be the IERS. Something as simple as finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or even

Re: The opportunity of leap seconds

2006-01-08 Thread Rob Seaman
On Jan 8, 2006, at 4:41 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: It sounds to me like BIPM ought to make an Internet service available which will deliver UT1 to astronomers in a timely fashion ? Not sure BIPM is necessarily the appropriate agent, but otherwise agree 100%. Perhaps we should seek other

Re: The opportunity of leap seconds

2006-01-08 Thread Poul-Henning Kamp
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Steve Allen writes: Something as simple as finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or even just a more stringent formatting of the bulletins on the ftp site could do it as well. I do not believe that any of the IERS bureaus have internet connections and servers which

Re: The opportunity of leap seconds

2006-01-08 Thread Poul-Henning Kamp
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Peter Bunclark writes: On Sun, 8 Jan 2006, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] You mean [EMAIL PROTECTED] That would be quiet useful. Otherwise let's not bother with NTP protocol, just [EMAIL PROTECTED] I don't really care what the service is

Re: The opportunity of leap seconds

2006-01-08 Thread Tom Van Baak
Research-quality telescopes, in particular all the ones built in the last few decades on alt-azimuth mounts, do of course use UT1; a 0.9s error would be a complex ~10 arcsec error in both axes and give a quite useless pointing performance. However, UTC is often used as a UT1 delivery system;

The opportunity of leap seconds

2006-01-07 Thread Rob Seaman
On Jan 7, 2006, at 8:02 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: I have no problems with different timescales for different purposes. Great! Consensus reached! Rejoicing in all the lands! May one suggest a parade in celebration? The great Parade of the Leap Seconds! To be held on December 31 or June

Re: The opportunity of leap seconds

2006-01-07 Thread Poul-Henning Kamp
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Rob Seaman writes: Astronomers use UT1. Astronomers use UTC. Astronomers are among the biggest users of TAI and GPS and likely any other timescale you care to name. And they certainly have a lot of trouble seeing the rest of the world in for the brightness of

Re: The opportunity of leap seconds

2006-01-07 Thread John Cowan
Rob Seaman scripsit: Unless we *completely* change our notion of Canoli, Canoli is tightly constrained to follow Eclair simply by the fact that today and tomorrow and the million days that follow are all required to be dark at night and light in the day. I think you are getting carried away

Re: The opportunity of leap seconds

2006-01-07 Thread John Cowan
Poul-Henning Kamp scripsit: By your logic, the U.S. Surgeon General should be a chiropractor. Once the US government tries to shoulder their national deficit that would undoubtedly be a good idea. Chiropractors are by no means cheaper to hire than other doctors. Nor are their treatments

Re: The opportunity of leap seconds

2006-01-07 Thread Rob Seaman
On Jan 7, 2006, at 11:37 AM, John Cowan wrote:Whether we choose to bleed off the daily accumulating milliseconds one second or 3600 at a time, bleed them we must...and even people who loathe the very notion of leap seconds admit this. NO, I DON'T ADMIT THAT.  On the contrary, I deny it, flatly,