[LEAPSECS] QB213 .R4 2013

[Steve Allen]

On Thu 2014-01-16T09:58:52 -0800, Eric Fort hath writ:

> Maybe it's time for the minders

> of astronomical periodicity and the minders of atomic periodicity to

> simply agree to disagree about what "time" is at it's core and simply

> use the timescale that is appropriate and useful for their own use.


They did.  It was completely clear to the principals at the 1964 IAU
General Assembly,
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1966IAUTB..12..304M
They also recognized that it was not clear to everyone else, so they
published the explanatory note seen on page 16 of the GA resolutions
http://www.iau.org/static/resolutions/IAU1964_French.pdf

In the discussion above it is also clear that the issue was not about
concept, it was about who gets to say what time scale is used in the
existing, deployed, operational radio broadcast signals that the many
national governments run for their own sovereign purposes.

That issue has been visible for the past decade in ITU-R
Question 236/7
http://www.itu.int/pub/R-QUE-SG07.236-2001
where the first question notes that the dichotomy still exists:
    1) What are the requirements for globally-accepted time scales for
    use both in navigation/telecommunication systems, and for civil
    time keeping?

For reasons not broadcast to the world, many of the national
delegations to the 2012 Radiocommunications Assembly did not find the
answers given in the draft revision of TF.460 to be satisfactory
enough for a vote.

--
Steve Allen                 <sla at ucolick.org>                WGS-84 (GPS)
UCO/Lick Observatory--ISB   Natural Sciences II, Room 165    Lat  +36.99855
1156 High Street            Voice: +1 831 459 3046           Lng -122.06015
Santa Cruz, CA 95064        http://www.ucolick.org/~sla/     Hgt +250 m