[LEAPSECS] civil-solar correlation with TI

[Zefram]

Rob Seaman wrote:

>Again, the issue is mean solar time, not local solar time.


This sentence doesn't make sense to me.  You seem to have a different
definition of either "mean" or "local" from me.  To be clear: the
(periodic) difference between apparent and mean solar time does not
affect my argument, so I ignored it; likewise, the difference between
solar time at one's actual longitude (local solar time) and solar time
at a nearby round-numbered longitude (standard time) is small and does
not affect the psychology.


>it is a question of discovering requirements implicit in our society.   


Good point.


>                                         Historians looking backward  

>want to relate events worldwide and arrange them into coherent  

>timelines.


Yes, they'll want the Olson database.


>            Whatever the preferences of the ITU, they will discover  

>that it is simply unacceptable to allow local dates to vary secularly  

>from civil timekeeping dates.


I don't see how this follows.  Given the Olson database they'll be able
to apply the offsets correctly.

If the date drift per se really is a problem, that would be a reason
to argue for the IDL-jumping version of my scenario, rather than the
unbounded-timezone-offset version.

-zefram