Ken Pizzini scripsit:
> Okay, I'll bite.
What Ken says, except that:
> Yes, civil time, an important consumer of any time standard, would
> much prefer approximation-of-earth-rotation-relative-to-the-sun
> than random-arbitrary-interval (e.g., 100,000 SI-second "days")
> or approximation-of-earth-rotation-relative-to-"fixed"-stars as its
> time standard.
I don't think this case has been made yet, other than by handwaving and
postulating. Specifically, that the current regime is better than a fixed
scheme of 1 day = 86400 SI seconds.
--
John Cowan <jcowan_at_reutershealth.com>
http://www.reutershealth.com http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
.e'osai ko sarji la lojban.
Please support Lojban! http://www.lojban.org
Received on Wed Jan 29 2003 - 03:54:25 PST