Re: [LEAPSECS] Mechanism to provide tai-utc.dat locally

From: Ed Davies <ls_at_edavies.nildram.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 26 Dec 2006 21:54:35 +0000

M. Warner Losh wrote:
> In message: <20061226205127.GD18690_at_ccil.org>
> John Cowan <cowan_at_ccil.org> writes:
> : M. Warner Losh scripsit:
> :
> : > If I was to compute the number of seconds between Jan 1, 2007 0:0:0 and
> : > Dec 31, 2008 23:59:50, the answer is 63071990 or 63071991 or 63071992.
> : > We have no way of knowing today how many seconds are in that interval.
> : > We do know the answer is one of the above.
> :
> : Technically 63071999 and 63071998 are also possibilities, though
> : I admit they are unlikely.
>
> you are correct... this simple stuff sure is hard...
>

How can 63071999 fit in? Wouldn't it be 63071989 for a single
negative leap second accepting Warner's numbers?

That's all of the seconds in 2007 and all but the last 9, 10 or 11
seconds in 2008, right? Then I get:

   63 158 387
   63 158 388
   63 158 389
   63 158 390
   63 158 391
   63 158 392 or
   63 158 393

assuming continuation of the Gregorian calendar so 2007 is not a leap year
but 2008 is and positive or negative leap seconds only at the end of 2007-06,
2007-12 or 2008-06. Bulletin C 32 (which appears to be current) says no
positive leap second at the end of 2006-12 (so we'd assume also no negative
leap second at that time, too) but says nothing of 2007-06 or later.

Bets against 63 158 387?

Ed.
Received on Tue Dec 26 2006 - 13:55:21 PST