[LEAPSECS] but what does Daniel Gambis say?B

[François Meyer]

On Wed, 27 Aug 2008, Steve Allen wrote:


> Serbian Astronomical Journal, including mention of negative leap seconds

>

> http://arXiv.org/pdf/0808.3612


As the authors write, this is a pure mathematical
prediction ; of course the agreement between the
model and the data is excellent for the period
covered by data, but with 17 harmonic terms it could
hardly be different. Now, though it is hard in the
paper to figure it accurately, it is clear that the
extrapolated curve rapidly and significantly
diverges from the data as soon as it goes backwards
in time before the dataset used for the fit (<1962) : i
there is no stated reason that this could be different 
for the period after the data (after 2007).

So the paper conclusion would more qualify as a
very speculative bet than as an argumented 
prediction.

-- 
François Meyer