NavList:
A Community Devoted to the Preservation and Practice of Celestial Navigation and Other Methods of Traditional Wayfinding
Dynamic time (was)Re: millenium - 2000 or 2001?
From: Rodney Myrvaagnes
Date: 1999 Dec 29, 9:27 AM
From: Rodney Myrvaagnes
Date: 1999 Dec 29, 9:27 AM
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
