Slashdot Mirror


Earth Travel On Time, Again

burgburgburg writes "The NY Times has an interesting article about a rather puzzling phenomena: for the fifth year in a row, the Earth's travel through space is right on time. The rate that the Earth travels through space has slowed ever so slightly for millenia. To compensate for this, since 1972, scientists have added a "leap second" at the end of each year. The problem: Since 1999, the Earth has been on time. The recognition of a need for a leap second was an unintended consequence of the invention of the atomic clock. Suggested reasons for the unexpected punctuality: the tides, weather and changes in the Earth's core."

12 of 361 comments (clear)

  1. Slightly more informative story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative
  2. clueless reporter by cyberman11 · · Score: 5, Informative

    According to http://tycho.usno.navy.mil/leapsec.html leap seconds compensate for changes in the earths rotational speed not the earths orbital speed.

  3. The article is wrong, should be rotation by Thagg · · Score: 5, Informative

    The leap second is added to compensate for the slowing in earth's rotation, not its motion around the sun.

    It is somewhat odd that the rotation has stopped slowing down. Some have speculated that as more and larger dams are built, creating large lakes far from the equator, that there's a net movement of mass closer to the axis -- causing the earth's rotation to increase in speed slightly.

    On the other hand, global warming and the melting icecaps and warming oceans should move mass away from the axis, slowing down rotation.

    It will be very interesting to see what happens over the next few years. I'd be curious if there's any relationship between the non-slowing of the earth's rotation and the decrease in the earth's magnetic field, mentioned in Slashdot a couple of weeks ago.

    thad

    --
    I love Mondays. On a Monday, anything is possible.
  4. 0.1 second irregularity and Modern Time Standards by thanasakis · · Score: 5, Informative

    There is a very comprehensive reference of currently used time standards over at wolfram research site. It came up yesterday while I was trying to figure out the difference between Universal Time (UT) and Coordinated Universal Time (UTC). In the last link I believe you will find that "Earth's rotation is irregular at the 0.1 second level" along with a diagram of the errors so far.

  5. here is a plot of the length of day by at10u8 · · Score: 4, Informative

    The IERS has a plot showing how the length of day has decreased over the past few years. Curiously, the current phase of accelerated rotation of the crust began right around the time we started adding leap seconds to UTC.

  6. Re:Full Text of Article by big-magic · · Score: 4, Informative
    The latest atomic clock that NIST is currently building will have a frequency uncertainty of 1 x 10^(-15). Since this is many orders of magnitude more precise than necessary to detect the need for a leap second, I highly doubt this is a problem with the many atomic clocks around the world.

    I got this value from the web site for the Time and Frequency division of NIST.

  7. Re:0.1 second irregularity and Modern Time Standar by at10u8 · · Score: 4, Informative

    The World of Astronomy site at Wolfram.com is a bit out of date and does not include the most recent changes in time scales. I recommend this page which describes the history of various time scales.

  8. Re:SOHO at the L1 Lagrange point? by Aglassis · · Score: 4, Informative

    According to Kepler's Third Law: the orbital period, T, and the semimajor axis, a are related by

    T^2/a^3 = 4 * pi^2 / ( G * M),

    where M is the mass of the Sun. Neglecting the gravitational attraction between the L1 mass and the earth (the L1 mass will be pulling the earth while its position remains constant since its pull towards earth is balance out by the pull toward the Sun), no change in Earth's mass will change its orbital period.

    --
    Suddenly, the hairy finger of a familiar monkey tapped me on the shoulder. It was time.--G. T.
  9. Earth orientation and the leap second by p_trekkie · · Score: 4, Informative

    As someone pointed out earlier, the article is incorrect, and a leap second is based on the slowing of earth's rotation.

    The dominant force behind the slowing is "tidal braking" from the moon. Basically, just as the moon exerts forces on the ocean, the ocean exerts forces on the moon. As a result, the moon is getting thrown gradually into higher and higher orbits because of force from the earth. The energy has to come from somewhere, and that somewhere is earth's rotational inertia.

    Leap seconds were implemented as a result of branch of astronomy known as earth orientation. Basically, Earth Orientation is astronomy backwards. By looking at distant quasars constantly and monitoring atomic clocks, astronomers can see minute changes in earth's rotation. Quasars are observed because they are bright (in the radio part of the spectrum) and are far enough away that any physical motion over time would be negligible in the night sky. Correcting for leap seconds and other rotational issues like precession and nutation allows for the accurate functioning of GPS.

    For more information, check out USNO's Earth orientation web site

  10. Re:Physics for the rest of us by Scott+Ransom · · Score: 5, Informative

    The Earth's rotation is referenced to quasars at cosmological distances from us. Since they are so far away, they are for all intents and purposes located at fixed positions on the sky (unlike many nearby stars which show parallax and proper motion over the course of a year or more). The postions are measured using radio VLBI (Very Long Baseline Interferometry) that can provide astrometric positions on the sky to better than a milli-arcsecond.

    For more info, browse here: http://hpiers.obspm.fr

    Note: IAAA (I am an astronomer)

  11. Re:Physics for the rest of us by MillionthMonkey · · Score: 4, Informative

    OK, that was a bad way of phrasing it. The 2-3 milliseconds is the rate at which the lag between UTC (earth) and UT1 (astronomical) time increases per day, not the change in length of each day relative to the last. The rest of what I said is still valid.

  12. Lots of long words... by HopeOS · · Score: 5, Informative

    A simpler explanation for those who got lost in the long words.

    Each day, the sun rises and sets a little more to the north or little more to the south depending on the season. The days of the year where the sun reaches the most north or most south are solstices. When the sun crosses the middle, they're equinoxes. The official "spring equinox" is when the sun crosses the middle moving north. If you were to call that the first day of the year and beginning counting days, you will total up 365 days between equinoxes. After about four years of that though, you'll be off by one, so you'll need to add an extra day. This is called "intercalation."

    One could make a rule to add an extra day every four years, but after 100 years or so, they would be foward one day too many. Skip the 100th year, and after 400 years, they'd be 1 day behind. The rule as it stands is every fourth year, except years ending in '00, plus every 400th year. Easy enough, but still not quite right.

    Because the rule is not quite right, it will never be perfectly accurate. But if you follow the rule exactly, you can tell that January 1, 1601 was Monday for instance. You can also tell exactly how many days are between now and January 1, 2400 because you know which years are leap years.

    The method of watching the sun and adding leap years as necessary is a great way to stay exactly on time, but really inconvenient if you need to predict exactly how every year will fall for the next 100 years or so.

    Some people say so what, just live. Who cares if your birthday in 20 years is on a Tuesday. Tax collectors care... Money lenders care... Hallmark greeting cards cares... Calendar makers care... The Vatican cares... So we use the 400 year rule and call it the Gregorian Calendar. It works well enough.

    As for TT, UT, UTC, TIA, ET, and a number of other time standards, well... the important thing is that we're now using very accurate clocks for counting seconds and we've determined that the earth does not spin all the way around in exactly 24 hours no matter how closely we've measured it. In fact, it had slowed down for awhile and now seems to have gotten back up to speed.

    We determine the difference between the atomic clock and the earth by watching the stars go by, and after spinning, spinning, spinning, we watch the atomic clock and the sky, and if it doesn't come out just right, we assume the clocks are right and the earth is wrong. To make up the difference, we throw in an extra second once every 6 months as necessary. It hasn't been necessary since 1999 which was the crux of the article.

    -Hope