Re: [LEAPSECS] The real problem with leap seconds

From: John Cowan <cowan_at_ccil.org>
Date: Sat, 7 Jan 2006 13:43:44 -0500

Steve Allen scripsit:

> The changes in the length of any kind of year are slight by comparison
> to the changes in length of day. Neglecting "short" period variations
> the length of the sidereal year has not changed much in a billion years.

That is to say, the current best approximation to the n-body problem of
the Solar System says that it hasn't. Fair enough. I merely threw that in
in case it was an issue.

> The Gregorian calendar was designed to match the "vernal equinox year".

Thanks for the correction.

> The new fields being added to GPS signals make them able to count leap
> seconds for 30000 years. That's quite an example of engineering margin.

Indeed. But then so is IPv6 (if we ever get it adopted widely).

--
John Cowan  cowan_at_ccil.org  www.ccil.org/~cowan  www.reutershealth.com
In the sciences, we are now uniquely privileged to sit side by side
with the giants on whose shoulders we stand.
        --Gerald Holton
Received on Sat Jan 07 2006 - 10:44:07 PST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sat Sep 04 2010 - 09:44:55 PDT