seaman at noao.edu
Thu Dec 30 21:24:17 EST 2010
Post the proposal. This is an international standard, discussions should be public. "Key figures" should participate in this list, not run to ground.
"Perspective" is not a monopoly. Declaring that "we're going to break it now, but reserve the right to fix it later" is not a strong argument for immediate change.
On Dec 30, 2010, at 7:14 PM, Jonathan E. Hardis wrote:
> On Dec 30, 2010, at 7:49 PM, Greg Hennessy wrote:
>>> To repeat myself, the punch line is this: NO ONE is advocating a perpetual drift apart between atomic time and "universal" time (sundial time).
>> What do you base this on, since I think the ITU proposal is exactly that?
> The proposal is to end the system of leap seconds as established in 1972.
> The proposal does nothing to tie the hands of any authority (e.g., ITU, CGPM) for future changes that would synchronize atomic and solar time.
> My perspective comes from several private discussions with key figures involved with the ITU study.
> - Jonathan
> LEAPSECS mailing list
> LEAPSECS at leapsecond.com
More information about the LEAPSECS