Slashdot Mirror


U.S. Scientists Call for a Time Change

saqmaster writes "The BBC reported yesterday that U.S. scientists want to change the current system which keeps clocks in sync with solar time by adding a leap second every 18 months or so. This has rattled a few cages with the scientists and operators involved in GMT-related projects and facilities as it would effectively remove the importance of the meridian from timing. "

12 of 465 comments (clear)

  1. In related news by A+beautiful+mind · · Score: 5, Funny

    From the article:"They want for the first time in history to separate us from the natural rotation of the Earth, which means as the years go by we will increasingly get out of sync with astronomy and the real world,"

    In other news, residents of Kansas experienced a timeshift, time going back to 1213 AD.

    --
    It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
    Be yourself no matter what they say
  2. Just call it stardate by Bastard+of+Subhumani · · Score: 5, Funny

    Just call it stardate, everyone will love it. Well, everyone here, anyway.

    --
    Only three things are certain; death, taxes, and apocryphal quotations - Ben Franklin.
  3. Changing the wrong thing by Shadow+Wrought · · Score: 5, Funny
    That we need to add a second every 18 months is obvious evidence that our time system is just too complex to have simply happened, and is therefore indicative of an intelligence in time design.

    This post brought to you from the Kansas Board of Edumacation.

    --
    If brevity is the soul of wit, then how does one explain Twitter?
  4. Why not adopt a universal ttime? by greymond · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why not just forget about time zones, day light savings and create a new universal global time. So what if it makes my 8am-5pm job change to 1am-9am or if it means I eat lunch during the night. It just seems like we are slowly outgrowing the need for this, as many people work normal hours that used to be considered odd (such as graveyard shifts)

    1. Re:Why not adopt a universal ttime? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      You don't go nearly far enough. Our base 60->60->12 time measuring system is hopelessly baroque and broke. What we need is a sensable metric timekeeping system which takes into account the four-day day as proven by the timecube.

    2. Re:Why not adopt a universal ttime? by Taevin · · Score: 5, Informative

      Who said anything about making half the world nocturnal? The only thing that would change by having a standard world time is the "time" people do their normal activities. Instead of going to work at 8:00 AM you might go in at 1:00 PM and work until 9:00 PM. Our time-keeping system already works this way, it just obfuscates it somewhat. The time zones are set up so that 8:00 AM CST is the same relative time of day (morning), as it is for people in China at 8:00 AM (it's morning for them though it's significantly off for people on the other side of the world). My time zone is GMT-5 so while people are just getting up for work at GMT, it's still very early morning for me and I'm fast asleep. What difference does it make if I go to work at 1:00 PM world time (still the same as 8:00 AM as far as I'm concerned) instead of 8:00 AM?

      Just to be perfectly clear, everyone would still go to sleep when it was dark and everyone would still get up for work/school/whatever when it became light out again. It would just VASTLY simplify moving between our current time zones or communicating with people in a different one. If someone works from 12:00 AM to 8:00 AM world time and I work from 6:00 AM to 2:00 PM world time, it's going to be damn easy to know that 6:00 AM to 8:00 AM is the timeslot we have to work with for meetings.

  5. Pretty dumb summary by Danuvius · · Score: 5, Informative
    The BBC reported yesterday that U.S. scientists want to change the current system which keeps clocks in sync with solar time by adding a leap second every 18 months or so. This has rattled a few cages with the scientists and operators involved in GMT-related projects and facilities as it would effectively remove the importance of the meridian from timing.
    Pretty dumb summary...

    What the US scientists are suggesting is that we ignore the earth's rotation in our time-keeping, and just try to keep roughly in synch by arbitrarily adding leap-seconds (as opposed to adding them based on our actual observation of the slowing of the earth's rotation). i.e.: Noon will be when your shiny digital watch says it is, not when the sun is precisely above the prime meridian (or precisely X.X hours plus or minus from said event, depending on your timezone).

    Dumb, dumb summary... the UK is defending the idea that humans (of both the blow-joe and the astronomical sort) base their sense of time on the earth's rotation... and so our method of time-keeping should do so as well.

    God... what a dumb summary...
    --
    Akarsz Magyar Gentoo fórumot? Akkor
  6. John Flamsteed by kst · · Score: 5, Funny
    From the article:
    The decision stemmed from the work 200 years previously of the first English Astronomer Royal, John Flamsteed, who calculated that the Earth rotated on its axis once every 24 hours.
    So he was the first person to notice this? How lucky for him that an hour already just happened to be 1/24 of a day!
  7. Re:It about time! by macdaddy357 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    All these inaccuracies are the direct result of primitive imperial measurements. It is high time for metric time!

    --
    How ya like dat?
  8. Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Why are you attacking Kansas? We are good God Fearing Christians who are carrying out His Will. I honestly do not get why some people feel the need to persecute Christians. At least you people aren't using lions.

  9. US versus UK?? by zCyl · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The first half of the article is very parochial - kind of ooh the nasty Americans want to diminish the importance of Greenwich.

    Which seems to be simply the delusion of the author, and has nothing to do with the subject of the discussion. The author has cast the entire thing as a US versus UK contest, with the noble UK scientists defending the importance of Greenwich, and the evil US overlords trying to steal it away and disrupt the lives of the common folk. First of all, I think if you polled US scientists, you'd find the vast majority of them quite content with the current system, and not calling for any change. In fact, you have to read halfway down the article to find out that the only people proposing a change are "US members of the International Telecommunications Union", without specifying which company they are referring to. Then somehow a handful of people at a telecommunications company issuing a proposal is amplified by this author to represent all US scientists and the views of Americans in general.

    This is just a classic case of crappy sensationalist reporting.

  10. It's the algorithm, stupid. by anon+mouse-cow-aard · · Score: 5, Informative

    BBC article completely misses the point. The international time reference, since the 1950's, has been UTC, and used tuned according
    to atomic clocks, not the earth's rotation. There are time references used specifically for astronomy, such as sidereal time, solar time, etc... (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sidereal_time) There is absolutely no reason why astronomical time references have to match precisely to the time reference used by normal people.

    The problem is that, today, there is no algorithm for knowing when to insert leap seconds ahead of time, which means you cannot calculate any time accurate to the second which is more than 18 months in the future, because you have no idea whether or not they will decide to insert a leap second. Nor is there any algorithm, other than a table of the known values to determine when to insert leap seconds. Add that they used to add them in June in some years, and December in others, and sometimes had two in the same year, and you get a feel for how chaotic it is.

    Accumulate these differences over twenty years, and you have a serious problem. That is why the global positioning system uses it's own time reference, which has no leap seconds. When you're calculating position based on propagation delays, leap seconds are a mess. so GPS time is currently (http://tycho.usno.navy.mil/gpstt.html) fourteen or fifteen seconds different from UTC. (how many leap seconds since 1999? no way to calculate, you just have to know.) Seconds are the basis for all computer based time scales. These little nudges make very little sense. It would be far smarter to insert a leap minute, every... oh... 90 years. Or make the leap second insertion an algorithmic event, and not some random decision negotiated among a committee of astronomers.