Re: [LEAPSECS] interoperability

From: Rob Seaman <seaman_at_NOAO.EDU>
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 10:13:16 -0700

On Jan 9, 2006, at 1:22 AM, Clive D.W. Feather wrote:

> At some point, probably around the time that we're seeing an hourly
> shift every year, people are going to have to divorce "second" from
> "day", or at least re-negotiate the terms of engagement.

By what magic do we believe the issues involved will become more
tractable "at some point" in the future?

How precisely does one divorce the definition of the day from that of
the second? What is a clock if not a device to slice days into
seconds? The fundamental problem is that the second is defined
against one underlying concept of time and the day against another.
As such, there are only three options:

        1) redefine the "day"
        2) redefine the "second"
        3) occasionally reset the clock

The only one of these that doesn't beg for a truly vast amount of use
case and requirements analysis is #3, the status quo. I suspect most
of us would be happy to pursue the research needed by either or both
of the first two options. How much more interesting than letting our
pasty complected cave dwelling descendants have all the fun!

Rob
Received on Mon Jan 09 2006 - 09:13:45 PST