[LEAPSECS] What's the point?

[Mark Calabretta]

On Fri 2011/02/11 15:42:41 -0000, Tony Finch wrote
in a message to: Leap Second Discussion List <leapsecs at leapsecond.com>


>> >Also, the "quadratic catastrophe" argument is usually used in support of

>> >UTC.

>>

>> Really?  Can you provide references for that.

>

>See for example

>http://six.pairlist.net/pipermail/leapsecs/2011-January/002124.html

>where Rob Seaman wrote "Civil timekeeping is cumulative. Tiny mistakes

>posing the problem will result in large and growing permanent errors."


You'd have to be a lawyer to be able to interpret that as an argument
for the "quadratic catastrophe" supporting UTC.

Regards,
Mark Calabretta