[LEAPSECS] LEAPSECS Digest, Vol 48, Issue 13

[Michael Deckers]

    On 2010-12-16 17:57, Dave Finkleman opined:


>  I learn something with every exchange.  Thanks.  This is what is in ISO

>  31-1, which is now ISO 80000-3

>  "time, time interval

>  duration    t

>  second      s


    [a lot of lines of Physics 101 elided]

    Well, I assume you knew these facts long before ISO 31 became
    deprecated. Standards often have to state the obvious, just in
    case. If you want beefy stuff, look into ITU-R TF.1010
    -- which also is 13 years old but regretfully not well-known.

    Anyway, in my humble opinion, the real issue, as far as the
    possible redefinition of UTC is concerned, is not the depth
    of one's insight into the physics of spacetime -- the
    clarification needed concerns the concepts (or the terminology,
    if you prefer), and the design goals, as Rob Seaman is
    continually pointing out with much more eloquence than
    I can convey in my scribblings.

    To put it in provocative terms: we (eg, the people on this list)
    do not agree on what a world-wide civil time scale should
    accomplish. I think we do not even agree on what a quantifiable
    time scale really is.

    Michael Deckers.