On 16 July 2011 01:22, Jim Lux jimlux@earthlink.net wrote:

I didn't see any smilies but it's a good point, although trying to get
the world to swallow that pill when some countries are using the
lunisolar calendar, which actually makes a lot of sense when you
listen to them but to us it seems to hark back to the dark ages.

So do you propose 10 hours a day with 100 minutes and 100 seconds...
Shame we could not decimalise the year as well, stupid earth taking
365 and a bit days to complete an orbit. No, let's drop the whole day
thing, we have electric light now so day and night no longer matter,
our decimal days could fit with a decimal year.

And back on earth, we have coped for centuries with the existing
system without the need of femto-second accuracy of the time. Yes, we
need precise measurement of a period standard and therefore a
frequency standard but the two are not the same thing or have the same
needs.

Steve

--
Steve Rooke - ZL3TUV & G8KVD
The only reason for time is so that everything doesn't happen at once.

• Einstein

On 16 July 2011 02:20, Poul-Henning Kamp phk@phk.freebsd.dk wrote:

Sorry to barge in here but I thought the leap second need was about a
two year thing so wouldn't that mean a ten second jump at the twenty
year mark.

Steve

--
Steve Rooke - ZL3TUV & G8KVD
The only reason for time is so that everything doesn't happen at once.

• Einstein

Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:

I would be happy with a solution that didn't shift my local noon by
more than what the time-zones do already... Now if we could just do
away with daylight savings time.

We are in complete agreement on that!

-Chuck Harris

In message CACTjVNyewpkSnJbt3DSf5KDvTq0JPwxM6X2RUXdXTcrp3jC7Hw@mail.gmail.com
, Steve Rooke writes:

No.

"schedule them 20 years in advance" is not the same as "schedule
once every 20 seconds".

If the time-lords want a leap second 2031-12-31, the have to say so
before before 2011-12-31, if they want one 2032-06-30, they have
to say so before 2012-06-30, etc.

--
Poul-Henning Kamp      | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG        | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer      | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.

On 16 July 2011 02:51, Poul-Henning Kamp phk@phk.freebsd.dk wrote:

Ah! I get you. Not 10 leap seconds at 20 year intervals, just an
almanac to indicate when they will be for up to 20 years in advance. I
guess that means they could take a bye for any scheduled event that is
not required, as in the 7 year period without one.

Steve

--
Steve Rooke - ZL3TUV & G8KVD
The only reason for time is so that everything doesn't happen at once.

• Einstein

In message CACTjVNy8h2EtHR_M6DquxhABhJb9NfgyauhJcN1bf-UMH+KhDQ@mail.gmail.com
, Steve Rooke writes:

Nope, once they have scheduled a leap-second, it happens.

--
Poul-Henning Kamp      | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG        | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer      | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.

On 16 July 2011 03:01, Poul-Henning Kamp phk@phk.freebsd.dk wrote:

And if it's not needed?

Steve

--
Steve Rooke - ZL3TUV & G8KVD
The only reason for time is so that everything doesn't happen at once.

• Einstein

In message CACTjVNynr5Vhrj=E+gFUnGeBPa_u8__26BhjaMK2NV6UXGi2Sg@mail.gmail.com
, Steve Rooke writes:

It is needed, otherwise they would not have scheduled it.

If they predict wrong all that happens is that DUT1 wanders a bit
more around and they will have to catch up with it over the next
couple of decades.

--
Poul-Henning Kamp      | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG        | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer      | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.

On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 23:09, Steve Rooke sar10538@gmail.com wrote:

Then they are exiled from Gallifrey, and fed to the Daleks.

Seriously, if we are announcing 20 years in advance, we accept that DUT may
be as large as 4 or 5 secs.  In which case, having an extra one (or not
having one when required) will not materially change the long-term
tracking.  Within a few years, the effect should lessen.

Although I would rather that leap secs stay, and DUT is kept small, if we
are not changing the definition of UTC, but loosening the strictness of the
tracking in the "short"-term, this may be a good compromise.

PHK, in your proposal, the long term stability of "low, bounded DUT" would
be guaranteed?

--
Sanjeev Gupta
+65 98551208    http://www.linkedin.com/in/ghane

On 16 July 2011 03:14, Poul-Henning Kamp phk@phk.freebsd.dk wrote:

So, your saying they will predict all the wobbling, drift, internal
earth changes, etc and do this with any accuracy 20 years in advance,
when we have already seen significant variations in this.

Given that straight-jacket, I suggest they schedule one every year
then they can add and subtract them willy nilly. Yes, New Years Day,
worldwide let's change the clock regardless. It would make it much
more fun for all of us to watch what happens. Yes, I'm game for that,
great idea.

Cheers,
Steve

--
Steve Rooke - ZL3TUV & G8KVD
The only reason for time is so that everything doesn't happen at once.

• Einstein