Subject: Re: internettime (was Re: leap second?)
To: None <email@example.com>
From: Thilo Manske <Thilo.Manske@HEH.Uni-Oldenburg.DE>
Date: 12/09/1998 13:56:10
In message <366DF36C.260435DD@bdl.mhri.edu.au>
Matthew ALDOUS <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> *I* personally think it's a good idea. If you don't know what it is, it=
> basically 1000 "swatch beats" in a day. (86.4 seconds per beat). This m=
> I can just say "@197" to someone in a different timezone, and not have
> to worry about geopolitical timezone shifts, etc. (I managed to be 2 ho=
> early to a web conference after daylight savings changed a while ago.)
Hmmm. *I* think it's a stupid marketing gag.
We allready have a worldtime. To be more exact we have quite a few
"universal times": UT0, UT1, UT2 and UTC.
In short: UTC is "our" time based on the physical definition of
1 second and UT0 is astronomical measured. UT1 and UT2 are UT0 with some
"corrections". IF UT1 and UTC differ by more than 0.7s we get a leap
second at the end of the year
If you're interested now, grab an astronomical encyclopaedia
and read about ET, TDT, TDB, TAI (...) as well ;-).
> I suppose what I'd really like to know, is if it is possible to do some=
> like this, or is it really hardware tied - or would break waaay too man=
> things. (how tricky is it to redefine a second?) - Mmm. no more timezon=
Maybe this is possible as an additional timezone (with a lot of hacking
due to the strange representation: "@xxx").
Mir ist mein Signature entlaufen :-(. Wer es findet, sende es bitte an
Thilo.Manske@HEH.Uni-Oldenburg.DE zur=FCck. Danke!=20