[LEAPSECS] but what does Daniel Gambis say?

[Rob Seaman]

Right.  That's a better way of saying it.  The paper doesn't describe  
the numerical techniques well enough to critique them.  There is some  
sort of linear component to the fit, but it doesn't appear to  
correspond to the tidal slowing term.  Perhaps clues are buried in the  
references.
--

On Aug 28, 2008, at 1:35 PM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:


> In message <48BE5E1D-7E1C-4F15-8D8D-47DC309B2A34 at noao.edu>, Rob  

> Seaman writes:

>

>> The 222 year period is most likely a meaningless artifact of the

>> data.

>

> Likely lack of DC removal and/or deficient windowing before running

> the FFT I suspect they used.

>

> -- 

> Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20

> phk at 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.

> _______________________________________________

> LEAPSECS mailing list

> LEAPSECS at leapsecond.com

> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs