|
|
Subject: Dynamic time (was)Re: millenium - 2000 or 2001?
From: Rodney Myrvaagnes (rodneym@XXX.XXX)
Date: Wed Dec 29 1999 - 11:26:37 EST
Tony,
This seems to me to be more on-topic for a navigation list.
I would suppose that anyone on this list knows that the
earth's rotation period, orbital period, and the vibration
period of a cesium atom are all natural quantities that
don't divide evenly into each other.
Being a frivolous type, I view leap seconds as another
excuse to pop a cork. But if you actually missed one, you
could bias celestial sights as much as a quarter mile.
Perhaps you (Tony) would care to expand on Terrestrial
Dynamic Time. At least I will read it if you do.
On Tue, 28 Dec 1999 21:02:18 -0800, Tony wrote:
>It seems to me that all this discussion does indirectly point out need for
>astronomical computations being carried out with respect to Julian day/date,
>irrespective of calendar date other than indirection through epochs. The fine
>tuning through leap year and leap second, plus Terrestial Dynamic Time is
>then better understood.
>
Rodney Myrvaagnes J36 Gjoa
Associate Editor Electronic Products
My oyster knife is Y2K compliant
|