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."

31 of 361 comments (clear)

  1. It's Obvious by dreamchaser · · Score: 5, Funny

    The Earth knows that we're watching now, so it's taking extra care to be punctual...

    1. Re:It's Obvious by Squareball · · Score: 4, Funny

      No, it's now on time. So that rules out it being a woman. ;)

    2. Re:It's Obvious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      But it knows where it's going, so that rules out it being a man. ;)

  2. All wrong... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Suggested reasons for the unexpected punctuality: the tides, weather and changes in the Earth's core.

    No. God just likes to screw with us.

  3. If we all run in one direction fast enough... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    .... we can speed it back up again.

    Let's do it!

  4. Slightly more informative story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative
  5. Next on Tom's Hardware - OC'ing the earth by xC0000005 · · Score: 5, Funny

    We decided that for a change this holiday we'd work on big iron - the earth. Using polar cap cooling and using two atoms instead of one in the atomic clock, we managed to accelerate the earth by 1 second. System is perfectly stable. Except in California. And Iran.

    --
    www.voiceofthehive.com - Beekeeping and Honeybees for those who don't.
    1. Re:Next on Tom's Hardware - OC'ing the earth by xC0000005 · · Score: 5, Funny

      It's running WindowsGE (geological edition). When you get a protection fault in the pacific, folks in Japan get the BWOD (blue wave of death). This was fixed in later revisions (code named Mars) Mars has no oceans, and hence no BWOD, but probe() calls tend to hang or crash on it.

      --
      www.voiceofthehive.com - Beekeeping and Honeybees for those who don't.
  6. 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.

  7. It's Because the Moon is Gone by hondo77 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Don't you guys remember back in 1999 when the moon blasted out of earth's orbit? That would probably explain the change.

    --
    I live ze unknown. I love ze unknown. I am ze unknown.
  8. Physics for the rest of us by Sean80 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    OK so help me out here. Pardon the pun, but how on earth do they figure out that the earth is in the exact same position as it was a 'year' ago? Do they use the background of stars, or some other mechanism? How can they reduce the error in such a measurement so that they can be sure that a second has been 'lost'?

    1. Re:Physics for the rest of us by utahjazz · · Score: 5, Funny

      how on earth do they figure out that the earth is in the exact same position as it was a 'year' ago? Do they use the background of stars, or some other mechanism?

      Duh. They use GPS.

    2. Re:Physics for the rest of us by MillionthMonkey · · Score: 4, Interesting

      "Duh. They use GPS."

      I really hope that was sarcasm...

      Why? GPS is great for this.

      The length of each day has typically been 2-3 milliseconds longer than the day before. And the equatorial rotational velocity is 1670 km/hr. That means that at midnight, a point on the equator can be 90-130 cm away from where it was at midnight on the night before. After a week, the apparent motion is 7-10 meters, and after a year of this, you've moved 300-500 meters due to changes in rotational velocity. That's very noticeable.

      The only thing that GPS directly measures is the exact location of a receiver relative to orbiting satellites. It doesn't know anything about the rotational position of the earth itself beneath your feet. So GPS has to be continually calibrated so that stationary receivers at fixed points on the earth's surface don't appear to be slowly drifting. The apparent position of a fixed reference receiver is uploaded to the satellites as a correction or else any stationary GPS receiver would show a very noticeable drift as the weeks went by and people would notice. It should be trivial to calculate the drift (and the necessity of a leap second) based on the necessary GPS corrections that had to be made during the year.

    3. 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)

    4. 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.

  9. this sucks by G27+Radio · · Score: 4, Funny

    I really could have used that extra second of sleep after partying late on new years eve.

  10. 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.
  11. 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.

  12. 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.

  13. Do atomic clocks keep perfect time? by G4from128k · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It seems to me that physicists assume that their atomic clocks keep perfect time. But what if they don't? What if some key physical constants are changing in our neck of the universe. As an engineer I have found that most physical constants aren't (everything is a function of everything, its just an matter of the coefficient). In the case of the atomic clocks, a change of only 32 parts per billion would change the timebase by one second per year. Perhaps a particularly large, long-wavelength gravity wave has stretched spacetime and changed the clocks? Perhaps the four fundamental forces oscillate in undiscovered ways?

    IANAP, so perhaps a professional could explain why the atomic clocks must be right -- why a 32 ppb variation in them is impossible (i.e. would manifest itself in other more obvious ways).

    --
    Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.
  14. 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.

  15. 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.

  16. The Core? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    I thought they fixed that core problem a few years back by blowing the shit out of it with a bunch of nukes! I saw a documentary on this recently.

  17. Re:It's those d*mned Republicans! by DaveAtFraud · · Score: 4, Funny

    You got it backwards. The "leap second" was needed because the Earth *was* taking a little longer. For some reason it has stopped being slow by a second. If anything, its the Democrats trying to get Bush out of office a little sooner.

    --
    They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither safety nor liberty.
    Ben
  18. Re:Full Text of Article by jaxdahl · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Is the Earth's *rotation* slowing or speeding up at all, though?

    Let's do some math and see how big of a distance difference a leap second is. Rough estimate of 93 million miles on average for r. 2*pi*r = 584,309,935 miles for the circumference of the orbit -- assuming a circular orbit. 60*60*24*365.25 = 31557600 seconds on average per year. circumeference/seconds ~= 18 miles. Interesting. But hardly seems like much.

  19. It's all about tides and the core by localroger · · Score: 4, Interesting
    There are two major effects going here. The first is the presence of the Moon and, to a lesser extent, the Sun. Tides drag on the Earth and slow its rotation. This is a relatively constant effect that is not going to change any time soon, for any reason, ever.

    Tidal slowing is also magnitudes more important than anything you'd see from mountain building, earthquakes, or any other surface phenomenon. The earth is BIG. But tides take out a LOT of energy. Tides are the major reason the Earth's rotational period slows over geological time.

    So right now, the Earth is not slowing; this must mean a shorter-acting phenomenon is supplying the rotational energy that the tides normally suck out. Again, there is only one thing big enough -- turbulence in the Earth's liquid core. Like the Earth itself the core is BIG so little changes in the fluid flow there can actually affect the Earth noticeably, and that flow is known to be chaotic -- because the magnetic field caused by that flow reverses periodically.

    My money would be on a near-term magnetic field polarity reversal. Of course "near term" probably still means it will be ten thousand years before it's a problem. Sucks to be a man-made satellite, though, especially when flying over the South Atlantic, an area where the Earth's magnetic field is already starting to do strange things.

    --
    Brackets contain world's first nanosig, highly magnified:[.]
  20. A different God? by HermanAB · · Score: 4, Funny

    Well, I suppose Jupiter sacked Atlas for his continual tardiness and the new God is still all gung ho about the promotion to the new job. Eventually he'll get tired too...

    --
    Oh well, what the hell...
  21. 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.
  22. 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

  23. Intercalation, Calendar Calibration, Leap Seconds by HopeOS · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I recently had to implement code to convert terrestrial time (TT) to martian solar day (MSD). Some interesting tidbits in that research follow.

    As you might guess, the extra days in leap years help keep our calendars synchronized with our actual position about the sun (heliocentric longitude). This is called intercalation, and the general rules governing the gregorian calendar cover 400 year periods. Other methods exist which are in a sense more "accurate," but less useful for predicting future dates. Fortunately, the earth is pretty regular in its movement around the sun.

    The 0 degree mark for heliocentric longitude occurs at the vernal equinox, an event that can be easily determined from earth, and has been for centuries. In the Iranian calendar, the new year begins on the day of the vernal equinox. Since this event occurs later in the day each year, eventually an extra day must be added. Such calendars are based on observation rather than rule-based model and consequently are implicitly self-calibrating.

    Leap seconds, as pointed out, are an entirely different beast, and are meant to shore up the discrepency between our actual rotation and the atomic clocks we use. The current offset is 22 seconds slow officially. Oddly enough, a NASA document from 1997 uses a value of 63 seconds as the offset between TT (terrestial time) and UTC (Greenwich Mean Time). Another from 2000 shows a 32.184 second offset from TT to TIA (atomic). It doesn't exactly correlate or add up, and I'm not precisely sure why that is. Perhaps someone could enlighten me on the matter.

    Curiously, our leap years follow the mathematical model while our leap seconds follow the observation method of calibration. Consequently, you can determine the correct date in the future, but not the correct second.

    -Hope

  24. 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