On Thu, 18 Mar 2010, Marshall Eubanks wrote:
Now, it is true that Ken Seidelmann is an astronomer, and he is
against the change, but that is mostly in a "if is isn't broke, don't
fix it" mode, and also because he is thinking of the long term (in 500
to 600 years the UT1-TAI offset should be order an hour, and people
can be expected to start complaining).
UT1 - TAI = 1h is more like 1000 years. See
http://www.ucolick.org/~sla/leapsecs/dutc.html#dutctable
I used to say that computer time should be TAI (closest to the actual
clocks, easy to calculate elapsed times), but that never seem to get
any traction.
At the moment it's best to see what the interminable and impenetrable
ITU-R process decides. You never know, the Unix time_t and NTP model of
time might turn out to have been the right thing all along :-)
Tony.
--
f.anthony.n.finch <dot(_at_)dotat(_dot_)at> http://dotat.at/
GERMAN BIGHT HUMBER: SOUTHWEST 5 TO 7. MODERATE OR ROUGH. SQUALLY SHOWERS.
MODERATE OR GOOD.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf