[ntp:questions] A Suggestion For Abolishing the Leap Second

Rob van der Putten rob at sput.nl
Thu Jun 7 08:26:04 UTC 2007


Hi there


Quadibloc wrote:

> Yes, this is quite right. However, while the second is no longer
> defined in terms of a fraction of the tropical year in 1900, the
> Earth's rotation still factors in to this in a more subtle way.
> 
> You see, the Earth is in *motion*. And the SI second is defined (in
> practice, within the framework of UTC) as so many vibrations of a
> cesium atom...*sitting on the Earth*. So what was being referred to in
> what you are quoting is _not_ time being defined in terms of the
> Earth's motion, instead of being atomic time (the poster works for
> NIST, and has authored several papers on the atomic time scale) but
> the fact that our current time scale doesn't include *relativistic
> corrections* for the Earth's motion.

I suppose one would have to apply a correction for the movement of the 
solar system through the galaxy as well. And the movement of our galaxy 
through the universe.


Regards,
Rob
-- 
Nothing is more surreal then reality




More information about the questions mailing list