Re: [LEAPSECS] The real problem with leap seconds

From: Warner Losh <imp_at_BSDIMP.COM>
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 17:26:13 -0700 (MST)

From: Mark Calabretta <mcalabre_at_ATNF.CSIRO.AU>
Subject: Re: [LEAPSECS] The real problem with leap seconds
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 11:15:09 +1100

> On Fri 2006/01/13 12:32:27 +1100, Mark Calabretta wrote
> in a message to: Leap Seconds Issues <LEAPSECS_at_ROM.USNO.NAVY.MIL>
>
> >So if asked for a definition I would say that "UTC (post 1972) is a
> >representation of TAI such that ... (you know the rest)".
>
> .. and I should have said that prior to 1972, when UTC had "rubber
> seconds", it was not a representation of TAI but something else again.

Yes. TAI was recoverable from the UTC that existed prior to 1972, but
the math wasn't a simple addition...

Warner
Received on Mon Jan 16 2006 - 16:27:40 PST