trading amplitude for scheduling (was Re: [LEAPSECS] leap seconds in video art)

[Rob Seaman]

Brian Garrett wrote: the mini-lectures did imply that leap seconds compensate for secular deceleration of the earth rather than seasonally accumulated differences between UTC and UT1. To the extent that I understand the point you are aiming for, this statement conflates two issues: 1) that the long term secular deceleration is only perceptible as a baseline trend hidden beneath large amplitude, short period, effects, and 2) that leap seconds aren't the result of new slowing (or speeding up), they are the result of cumulative clock corrections required due to previous slowing. I agree with both, but just because we're bleeding off the cumulative terms seasonally (which I take to mean "over short term periods of whatever duration and connected to whatever physical cause"), it doesn't mean the secular trend is not pertinent.  We're required to synchronize two clocks whose rates differ.  We cannot adjust the rates ourselves and they are slowly drifting further out of step due to the inconvenience of physical reality (or a "charming fact of life in the solar system" as someone said). The impact of the short term effects isn't to either increase or decrease the net number of leap seconds, it's to play bloody hell with their scheduling.  I perceive this as a fact of life that should be accommodated (and that serves as job security for folks like Daniel Gambis).  Others perceive this as an awkward reality to attempt to ignore (although the ALHP will result in twice as many leap seconds than otherwise when the first leap hour is announced in 2606 by Obi Wan Gambis). The charm of Felicity's work is in the implied distinction between the trees of the experts and the forests of the public. Rob Seaman NOAO