[LEAPSECS] the big artillery

[Brooks Harris]

On 2014-11-04 03:27 PM, Zefram wrote:
> Brooks Harris wrote:
>>                     To call it "UTC" seems a bit of a stretch to me,
>> but there's no generally accepted name for what Zefram calls
>> "rubber-seconds era of UTC". Everybody has seized the name, and
>> attempted to give it some meaning other than what I, at least,
>> consider to be its origin - 1972-01-01T00:00:00Z,
> The name "Coordinated Universal Time" and initialism "UTC" are used
> in the IAU 1967 resolutions, referring to the rubber-seconds system.
> The resolutions note some possible tweaks to the tracking system.
> For example:
>
>      G. M. R. Winkler put forward a proposal to increase the tolerance
>      of the representation of UT2 by UTC to 300 ms and to authorize the
>      Director of the Bureau International de l'Heure (BIH) to change the
>      frequency off-sets at the beginning of any month.
>      ...
>      D. Belocerkovskij confirmed that the coordination with the BIH in
>      frequency will continue, but that the maximum tolerance in UT2-UTC
>      is limited to 50 milliseconds.
>      ...
>      B. Guinot asked for statements by users on whether they prefer
>      offsets in frequency or steps in time.
>
> The name and initialism weren't used in the IAU 1964 or 1961 resolutions,
> in places where one would expect them.  These resolutions refer to time
> signals and the steering mechanism without ever naming the synthetic
> time scale.
>
> So the name was around before 1972 (though not as far back as 1961),
> and did refer to the pre-1972 system.  I don't recall there ever being
> controversy before on whether the rubber-seconds system is actually part
> of UTC.  Those sources that use "UTC" to refer only to the leap-seconds
> era do so merely out of ignorance.
I'm aware of these (slightly controversial) facts. It seems most 
sensible to me that the "leap-seconds era" is where "UTC" begins, but 
there are obviously many opinions about it. Since there is controversy 
and misunderstanding about what UTC actually is, maybe there *is* a 
reason to rename it. :-(

How about "Leap Second Time (LST)"?  That should appeal to the 
[LEAPSECS] fans, but I'll bet I get flamed. :-)

Anyway, if the people on this list can't agree there's certainly a 
reason to clarify it.

-Brooks

>
> -zefram
> _______________________________________________
> LEAPSECS mailing list
> LEAPSECS at leapsecond.com
> https://pairlist6.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
>
>