[LEAPSECS] Saint Crispin's Day
phk at phk.freebsd.dk
Mon Oct 25 14:50:01 EDT 2010
In message <09B6E6AF-6426-4068-A4A8-F4ADE644A571 at noao.edu>, Rob Seaman writes:
>On Oct 25, 2010, at 8:28 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
>No. Diurnal rhythms are more pronounced than ever in human systems
>and processes. Allowing these to drift is a poor engineering choice.
Yes, indeed. It has been nothing but trouble for us that the usual
human circadian rythm is a couple of hours longer than 24 hours the
planet currently cares to rotate in.
I am sure that a second every other year makes all the difference in
>> The suns position in the sky has nothing to do with this, that is
>> in the hands of the local(-ish) politicians who legislate your
>I'm skeptical that leaving much if any responsibility in the hands
>of local politicians results in a net good to humanity :-)
Well, that remains to be seen, it is however, how things are legally
arranged around here, and so far it seems to be the least bad of the
>By all means, however, assemble materials related to your notion
>that timezones can provide an acceptable substitute.
They seem to have done a damn good job for 120 years now, including
quite a few changes to them, caused by such diverse events as
marriages(!), wars, unions, more wars, and even tourism.
In fact, I have yet to see a single shred of evidence that they would
not be more than able to cope with the problem, particularly Chinas
wanton diregard for solar position in the heavens seems to indicate
>> PS: You still have not answered my question: Why did you use UTC
>> when you knew it was the wrong timescale for your astronomical
>> applications ?
>I've answered several times. Your premise is wrong. Astronomers
>often use universal time. UTC is currently an acceptable approximation
>to universal time
But you are still not answering my question:
How could it ever be considered good design to embed a politically
controled timescale, subject to lots of valid scientific criticism,
into the design of astronomical equipment ?
Clearly, that is negligent design, isn't it ?
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.
More information about the LEAPSECS