Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> Rob, If you feel uncomfortable with calling leapseconds
> discontinuities, then we can use the term arrhythmia instead.
Which raises the question of why projects requiring an interval time
scale lacking in such arrhythmias would have selected UTC in the
first place. And why timekeepers who understand these issues would
focus on "remediating" (i.e., eviscerating) UTC as the cure.
Astronomers are among the power users for interval time as well as
time-of-day. Helioseismologists (
http://gong.nso.edu) needed an
interval timescale that would be even tempered over years or even
decades (a solar cycle is eleven years - the magnetic field flips at
solar max, so a complete sample would require 22 years) - so they
selected GPS, not UTC.
But actually, I think we should call leap seconds what they are -
intercalary events. My wife works at the Arizona-Sonora Desert
Museum. We have family visiting and decided to spend the day at the
museum - a good way to end a year. I especially recommend the raptor
free flight program - the ferruginous hawk is especially impressive.
My point is that a javelina is not a pig, a coatimundi is not a
raccoon, and a ringtail "cat" is not a cat. A kangaroo rat is, of
course, neither. And a leap second is a not a discontinuity.
Imprecision in terminology leads to poor decision making.
Rob
Received on Sun Dec 31 2006 - 18:03:57 PST