Dear Rob,
No one seems to have responded to your message
of 1 December in which you drew attention to:
http://futureofutc.org/preprints
Apart from the nice picture of the Prague clock
this is rather heavy going!
For lighter reading, I turned to the comments
that were sent in from round the world:
http://www.cacr.caltech.edu/futureofutc/preprints/18_AAS_11-668_Epilogue.pdf
Numerous contributors familiar to readers of
this mailing list sent in comments including:
Tony Finch
Rob Seaman
Patrick Powers
Frank King
John Davis
Christopher Daniel
The summary showed that there were about 450
contributors of whom 76% were in favour of
the status quo [keeping the leap second].
Two comments especially appealed to me:
John Davis said:
I (or my descendants) do not wish to have
noon drift into the middle of the night.
An anonymous contributor said:
If you want a timescale with a constant
offset from TAI, why not just use TAI?
Many others said much the same less succinctly!
The Royal Institute of Navigation seem to have
been allowed the last words and say:
In summary, making this change to UTC has a
rather esoteric rationale, limited benefits
and potentially significant costs.
Unfortunately, the matter remains unresolved.
Frank King
Cambridge, U.K.
---------------------------------------------------
https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial
