GMT and UTC are kept in approximate synchronization by the addition of leap seconds into UTC whenever the difference between the two drifts by more than one second. I do however recall that last year there was an attempt to allow UTC to drift by up to one hour from GMT before inserting a leap-hour. The rationale was that inserting leap-seconds imposed an increasing burden on manufacturers of GPS equipment, so this was an effort to kick the problem into the long grass for four of five hundred years.
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of James Frysinger Sent: 09 July 2008 20:16 To: U.S. Metric Association Subject: [USMA:41366] Re: Journalism & AP Guidelines On UTC, UT0, UT1, and so forth, see http://tycho.usno.navy.mil/systime.html GMT was the time kept astronomically, hence the "Mean" adjective. It closely resembles UT1 at Greenwich. TAI is the time kept by atomic clock. Jim m. f. moon wrote: > Brian, as far as I know, there is no adjustment for UTC to GMT. I don't think > GMT is used for any thing today. Most or all time keeping laws refer to UTC. > UTC is a symbol, just as in SI usage, and is the same world-wide. It is best > to keep with UTC even though GMT is commonly used -- I saw it recently on a > new watch. The basic standard I think is tied to the prime meridian which is > no longer the famous line at Greenwich as the prime meridian is now about one > meter east of the original line. The whole issue of "standard" time is very > messy and is best reviewed at the International Telecommunication Union site > or perhaps using Google. > > Marion > > ------ Original Message ------ > Received: Wed, 09 Jul 2008 09:42:43 AM PDT > From: Brian J White <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED],"U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [USMA:41355] Re: Journalism & AP Guidelines > > Yes, but while being technically different, they are both the same > time for general purposes. And isn't UTC micro-adjusted to match GMT? > > At 09:32 2008-07-09, m. f. moon wrote: >> Stan, there was an article in a recent LA Times about time and GMT -- no >> reference to UTC. I wrote the writer a brief note about UTC and the fact it > is >> universally used and that GMT was to be deprecated. I explained the origin > and >> why UTC is used. I said that he missed a great opportunity to educate the >> public about UTC. He gave me the courtesy of no response. Not directly > related >> to SI but close, I think. >> >> Marion Moon >> >> ------ Original Message ------ >> Received: Wed, 09 Jul 2008 03:22:59 AM PDT >> From: "STANLEY DOORE" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]> >> Subject: [USMA:41352] Re: Journalism & AP Guidelines >> >> Nice going Victor. >> It shows how much control the media have over what the public reads, > sees >> and hears. >> It's not surprising. My experience has shown that newspaper editors > and >> writers are opposed to the metric system regardless of its ease of use, its >> use in science and technology, and its use internationally. >> Keep up the good work! >> Stan Doore >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: Victor Jockin >> To: U.S. Metric Association >> Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2008 1:24 AM >> Subject: [USMA:41351] Re: Journalism & AP Guidelines >> >> >> With respect to journalistic style guidelines, I e-mailed Kenneth Chang > of >> the New York Time regarding an article he wrote covering NASA's current >> Mercury probe mission. A very nice piece, but full of references to miles, >> even though an accompanying NASA photo showed notations in kilometers. I > was >> pleased to get a prompt reply, which made clear that Ken, perhaps not >> surprisingly for a science writer, is as much an advocate of the metric > system >> as any of us. But his employer sets style guidelines on this issue that are >> similar to AP's, portions of which Ken quotes in his response below. >> >> To reiterate, it seems to me that we should start building a list of >> signatories in science, education, journalism, etc., to protest guidelines > in >> journalistic style manuals mandating the use of traditional US measurement >> units. Perhaps, eventually, Mr. Chang could be a weighty addition to that >> list. >> >> >> >> >> From: Victor Jockin >> To: Kenneth Chang >> Date: July 7, 2008 >> Thanks for your excellent article about NASA's mission to Mercury. >> Outstanding science reporting is one reason I'm loyal to the Times. >> >> Consistent with practice across nearly all fields of science, NASA has >> principally used metric units of measure for many years. I believe the last >> vestiges of traditional units are being phased out now, with the upcoming >> retirement of the shuttle. The excellent service you and other Times science >> reporters provide in educating the public would be enhanced if you would >> publish measures in the units that scientists actually used to report them, >> perhaps with parenthetical translations. We all learned metric units in > grade >> school, and for readers of the Times science pages, even parenthetical >> translations into traditional units are scarcely necessary. >> >> Keep up the great science reporting, but help America keep moving >> forward on >> metric usage, as NASA is doing, and pass on NASA's measurements straight-up. >> >> From: Kenneth Chang >> To: Victor Jockin >> Date: July 8, 2008 >> Thank you very much for the compliments. I personally would love it if > the >> U.S. went metric -- I've generated a number of corrections by botching the >> conversion from metric to English units (all too easy to do, since no one >> thinks in millionths of an inch or minus-500 Fahrenheit, and then it's too >> late before you realize minus-500 is impossible). >> >> The New York Times stylebook says, "Ordinarily convert >> measurements from the >> metric system to the American one. Delete the original measure unless it is >> truly useful." Putting both values in gets clumsy and distracting (in the > same >> way that the speed limit signs in mph and km/hr were never useful or >> edifying). >> >> On the Web, we could insert pop-up links so that the reader could move > the >> mouse over a quantity and the metric value would pop up. I haven't been able >> to convince anyone to implement this idea... >> >> Thanks for your email. >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: VictorJockin >> To: U.S. Metric Association >> Sent: Tuesday, July 08, 2008 3:22 AM >> Subject: [USMA:41344] Journalism & AP Guidelines >> >> >> I've been thinking about the issue of the AP style guidelines >> that came up >> a couple of weeks back, and it seems to me that we need to put our heads >> together and decide what our best shot is at doing something about this. >> Requiring traditional units in news stories, typically to the exclusion of >> metric units, is obviously a huge obstacle to general use of metric. But > it's >> a barrier that doesn't require legislative action to fix, something we lack >> the influence and/or money to achieve. It wouldn't be easy to change AP's >> mind, of course, but it would be easier than changing Congress's mind, and >> would represent an important and concrete step forward. >> >> First, we could use our existing connections to assemble the largest >> coalition of scientists, educators, journalists, etc., that we can. Through >> networking, the group of signatories could grow quite large. We may need to >> circulate a draft for some time, perhaps a year or more, and we should focus >> on recruiting as many journalists and journalism professors as possible. >> Then, we need to jointly and formally approach AP with our statement, and > the >> angle we should take with them, it seems to me, is objectivity. > Journalistic >> style guidelines should not require reporters to take sides on social > issues, >> or to advocate for particular political outcomes. Traditional units, we >> should point out, are not the law of the land, but a social preference. And >> in fact, it was the intent of Congress to initiate and encourage a voluntary >> transition away from that historical social preference and toward the metric >> system. Should this transition take place or not? That's a social and >> political question that a journalist should not be required, as a matter of >> style, to take sides on. And yet, that is just what AP is doing. It would > be >> as if AP specified that journalists not use the term African American in > place >> of black. Social preferences continually evolve on such issues, and good >> journalists are witnesses, not advocates, during such transitions. >> >> Thoughts? > > > > > > > -- James R. Frysinger 632 Stony Point Mountain Road Doyle, TN 38559-3030 (H) 931.657.3107 (C) 931.212.0267
