[ntp:questions] Re: Leap second talks are postponed

Bjorn Gabrielsson bg at lysator.liu.se
Sun Nov 20 22:59:22 UTC 2005

Richard Owlett <rowlett at atlascomm.net> writes:

> Bjorn Gabrielsson wrote:
> > Happy Trails <undisclosed at obscure.com> writes:
> >
> >>We in the eastern part of north America just fiddled with the idea of
> >>postponing our return to standard time from daylight time, and I did
> >>not hear of any plagues, epidemics or mass hysteria resulting from
> >> this.  Get real.
> >>
> >>Get a realistic argument.
> > Its not about real arguments, its the last battle for the
> > astronomers, the former timekeepers of our planet. It seems its hard
> > for them to let go of their last direct influence on UTC. So there is
> > much more politics, emotions and FUD than real arguments... Reducing
> > the steps in our major timescale by a few thousand times
> > _is_ a good thing.
> > --
> >    Björn
> But astronomers may be right. They *do* have the *long* view in mind.

Whats the long view problems with leap hours instead of leap seconds? 

> OK, bad pun. But I'm serious about the point.

Me too!. With todays computerised economy. Are you sure all financial
systems handle transactions during a leap second event correctly. 30
years ago this was no problem. A human would not be tricked, but the
computer program must take explicit care of all corner cases.

If the astronomers want UT1, maybe they should lobby to get UT1-UTC or
UT1-TAI broadcasted on the data channels of GPS or Galileo. Even if
its a prediction, it would be much better than the current implicit

btw, TAI (and UTC) is a weighted sum of many clocks around the
world. How much does the autors of the proposal contribute to the
timescale?  If the biggest "time factories" in the world make a
suggestion, maybe you read it twice...?


More information about the questions mailing list