[LEAPSECS] What's the point?
Mark Calabretta
mcalabre at atnf.csiro.au
Sun Feb 13 19:29:20 EST 2011
On Fri 2011/02/11 15:42:41 -0000, Tony Finch wrote
in a message to: Leap Second Discussion List <leapsecs at leapsecond.com>
>> >Also, the "quadratic catastrophe" argument is usually used in support of
>> >UTC.
>>
>> Really? Can you provide references for that.
>
>See for example
>http://six.pairlist.net/pipermail/leapsecs/2011-January/002124.html
>where Rob Seaman wrote "Civil timekeeping is cumulative. Tiny mistakes
>posing the problem will result in large and growing permanent errors."
You'd have to be a lawyer to be able to interpret that as an argument
for the "quadratic catastrophe" supporting UTC.
Regards,
Mark Calabretta
More information about the LEAPSECS
mailing list