[LEAPSECS] a modest proposal
seaman at noao.edu
Sun Feb 10 22:12:43 EST 2008
Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> I think we have been over this ground before.
Well, knock me over with a feather!
> It obviously follows, that with leap second granularity of 1 SI
> second, you need to keep track of the residual also, so your
> telescope already uses (UTC + DUT1), effectively UT1, for pointing,
> right ?
No. Some applications are DUT1 aware. Many are not, precisely
because DUT1 is required to be small. The former will be subject to
Y2K-like failures. The latter will require more drastic rewriting of
algorithms. This will clearly be a much larger expense to astronomy
than Y2K. Moving on...
>> Which is it? Either the cessation of leap seconds is a complex
>> question that demands a well thought out plan - or the cessation of
>> leap seconds is a simple question for which a plan would be trivial
>> to generate at the level of nuance required. Either way, is it too
>> much to expect that an actual plan be written?
> I would expect, that the plan may be written down on the back of a
> napkin somewhere, having the following substance:
> 1. Ratify changed document.
> 2. Announce changed document.
> 3. Mail copy to BIPM.
> 4. Case closed -- not our problem any more.
> That is a large part of the attractiveness of just dropping leap-
A monk asked Chao-chou, "Has the cow Buddha nature or not?" Chao-chou
More information about the LEAPSECS