Re: sped up the Earth's rotation and tipped the planet's axis

loop_

It won't even delay the next leap second,

Jan

On Mar 10, 1:17=A0pm, nos...@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) wrote:
...

The idea of a single addition/subtraction of a 'leap second' is
repugnant in the extreme given that it shows no clear understanding of
the calendar system,what it does and how it got to be that way,up to
and including the 86,400 leap second correction every 4th year in
order to correct the 365/366 day calendar cycle back to the raw
astronomical cycle.

The calendar represents the convenience of a linear progression of
years using the equable/average 24 hour day from a raw orbital cycle
and if an individual learned that much they would have achieved a good
day's work.

The leap second, unlike the day added in a leap year, has nothing to
do with the seasons.

Instead, just as a leap day keeps the calendar in line with the
seasons, a leap second keeps our clocks in line with the daily cycle
of night and day. This is because we have chosen an unchanging
_mechanical_ standard for the second, which was derived from the
average length of the day more than a hundred years ago, so that in
terms of that second, the day is no longer exactly 24 hours long; the
tides make the day rotate more slowly by a very slight amount.

We have leap days because the natural day does not fit exactly into
the natural year of the seasons (the tropical year). We have leap
seconds because our artificial second does not fit exactly into the
natural day.

While leap seconds are an inconvenience, and having civil time use a
longer second than electronics, as used to be the case, would not be a
disaster, no "misunderstanding" is involved that I can see.

John Savard

On 3/10/10 12:46 PM, oriel36 wrote:


Now Gerald, you should realize that sometimes leap seconds
are added (or subtracted) to keep so the civil time and sidereal
day will stay synced, just like we add (or don't add) leap days
to keep the seasons synced with the sidereal year.

The leap day is a consequence of determining the annual motion of the
Earth through the constellations in 365 days 5 hours 49 minutes using
the average 24 hour day which is based on the average return of the
Sun to noon,given that the natural noon cycles are unequal -

"Here take notice, that the Sun or the Earth passeth the 12. Signes,
or makes an entire revolution in the Ecliptick in 365 days, 5 hours 49
min. or there about, and that those days, reckon'd from noon to noon,
are of different lenghts; as is known to all that are vers'd in
Astronomy. Now between the longest and the shortest of those days, a
day may be taken of such a length, as 365 such days, 5. hours &c. (the
same numbers as before) make up, or are equall to that revolution: And
this is call'd the Equal or Mean day, according to which the Watches
are to be set;." Huygens

http://www.xs4all.nl/~adcs/Huygens/06/kort-E.html

A leap day and consequently the 86,400 leap seconds is the only valid
addition as it corrects the annual 5 hour 49 difference every 4th year
back to the constellation all framework,the system is so old and so
accurate that the 11 minute difference to 6 hours had amounted to 10
days before the Gregorian correction and it has nothing to do with the
seasons.

A calendar generates the convenience of a linear progression of years
using average 24 hour days or rather,converts the raw astronomical
cycles into the human devised timekeeping averages,because of its
nature,the timekeeping system we use today would have had to come from
the mind of a single unknown individual - I honor him while you do
not.

The idea of a direct external reference for daily rotation using the
circumpolar motion of the constellations,hence your individual 'leap
second',is so intellectually vacuous that it is indeed repugnant for
it all goes back to the silly statement of one person in the late 17th
century -

"... our clocks kept so good a correspondence with the Heavens that I
doubt it not but they would prove the revolutions of the Earth to be
isochronical... " John Flamsteed

What he was looking at and you still are, is a timekeeping average
within the confines of the 365/366 day calendar system and it is a
travesty that in the 21st century that you choose to be bound to the
error of a single person who links the dynamic of the Earth directly
with a celestial sphere framework or what amounts to the same thing -
the circumpolar motion of the constellations -



The price of your single 'leap second' and the reasoning you attach to
it is horrifying and should be for all intelligent people,that it
continues reflects badly on us as a race yet the people who will truly
be seen as brilliant will be those who work towards correcting the
matter rather than those who continue to defend that silly mistake of
Flamsteed even though I know Newton built on that calendar based
framework by trying to force the orbital motion of the Earth into the
365/366 day framework.