[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.

Nothing is more surreal then reality

More information about the questions mailing list