[LEAPSECS] How good could civil timekeeping be?

[Rob Seaman]

> Discussing leap seconds with you is like discussing papal  

> infalibility with a catholic priest.


The good fathers at Villanova might balk at characterizing me so.  I  
won't respond to the rest of your commentary, other than to point out  
that "infalibility" is misspelled :-)

My general intent is to stay on message whatever the context.  I could  
certainly wish my rhetorical skills were less abrasive, thus more  
persuasive.


> What are your comments to my proposal to announce leap seconds 10  

> years in advance?


It would require more detail to amount to a proposal...


> Could you live with that?


...and a viable process for adopting any sort of proposal requires  
more extensive vetting :-)

That said, I perceive no issues with extending the leap second  
schedule - per se.  The proposal would need to delve into the  
magnitude of DUT1.  While such a possibility was mentioned in the  
original GPS World piece, the intent has clearly always been to  
eliminate leap seconds entirely.

My own ancient precis for a proposal (http://iraf.noao.edu/~seaman/ 
leap) also focuses on tweaking the scheduling algorithm and I think  
there are many possibilities there.  It is not the astronomers who  
have been unwilling to entertain alternative concepts of civil  
timekeeping.

Rob Seaman
NOAO