| |
Main
Date: 17 Aug 2007 12:09:05
From: Paul Hirose
Subject: zone time in U.S. now based on UTC
|
A few days ago the President signed legislation which, among
other things, amended existing law to define the U.S. time zones in
terms of UTC instead of mean solar time.
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h110-2272
(search for STANDARD TIME -- it's about 1/4 of the way down the
document)
But there is provision for a U.S. version of UTC: "In this section,
the term 'Coordinated Universal Time' means the time scale maintained
through the General Conference of Weights and Measures and interpreted
or modified for the United States by the Secretary of Commerce in
coordination with the Secretary of the Navy."
This legislation also modifies an 1866 law which authorized the metric
system. That part appears to be just an update on the exact meaning of
"the metric system of measurement".
--
Paul Hirose <jvcmz89uwf@earINVALIDthlink.net >
To reply by email remove INVALID
|
|
| |
Date: 30 Aug 2007 03:40:44
From: oriel36
Subject: Re: zone time in U.S. now based on UTC
|
On Aug 30, 5:22 am, "jhar...@tcs.wap.org" <jhar...@tcs.wap.org > wrote:
> On Aug 19, 2:53 pm, n07W33+mg...@cl.cam.ac.uk (Markus Kuhn) wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Paul Hirose" <jvcmz89...@earINVALIDthlink.net> writes:
>
> >
|
| |
Date: 29 Aug 2007 21:22:05
From: jhardis@tcs.wap.org
Subject: Re: zone time in U.S. now based on UTC
|
On Aug 19, 2:53 pm, n07W33+mg...@cl.cam.ac.uk (Markus Kuhn) wrote:
> "Paul Hirose" <jvcmz89...@earINVALIDthlink.net> writes:
>
>
|
| | |
Date: 29 Aug 2007 22:55:31
From: Greg Crinklaw
Subject: Re: zone time in U.S. now based on UTC
|
jhardis@tcs.wap.org wrote:
> Reality is much less interesting than conspiracy theories.
To the small minded, I suppose. Personally I think it's the other way
around...
--
Greg Crinklaw
Astronomical Software Developer
Cloudcroft, New Mexico, USA (33N, 106W, 2700m)
SkyTools: http://www.skyhound.com/cs.html
Observing: http://www.skyhound.com/sh/skyhound.html
Comets: http://comets.skyhound.com
To reply take out your eye
|
| |
Date: 29 Aug 2007 20:22:18
From: jhardis@tcs.wap.org
Subject: Re: zone time in U.S. now based on UTC
|
On Aug 17, 3:09 pm, "Paul Hirose" <jvcmz89...@earINVALIDthlink.net >
wrote:
> This legislation also modifies an 1866 law which authorized the metric
> system. That part appears to be just an update on the exact meaning of
> "the metric system of measurement".
Hardly. The purpose of the amendments was to harmonize U.S. law with
respect to the definition of the "candela," one of the seven SI base
units.
The 1948 definition of the candela was written into statute at the
time, in celebration of its adoption. Prior to 1948 there was no
uniform international standard on luminous intensity -- roughly
speaking, on the brightness of light (stories of standard whale-oil
candles not withstanding). In 1979, the CGPM changed the definition of
the candela to the one used today. However, after 31 years, no one
remembered that there was a law about it. (No other SI unit was
defined by law.)
In the mid-1990's, while passing time with Alta Vista (what we old
timers used before Google), I searched on "candela." It found the word
on a page at www.law.cornell.edu. An explicative ensued.
The "simple" solution would have been to amend the law, replacing the
1948 definition with the 1979 one. However, that would have merely
passed the root problem down to the next generation. Congress and the
Administration, in their wisdom, decided for the more holistic fix.
The Metric Act of 1866 predated the Treaty of the Meter. It was
antequated in several ways. First, it only covered meters and
kilograms, not the other five base units. Second, it defined meters
and kilograms in terms of yards and pounds -- backwards to the modern
view of things (since the Treaty). Third, 1960's era law on metric
education defined the metric system as SI -- all seven base units. So
it made sense to take the well-established language from the education
law and to use it in the Metric Act too.
As I said, in the late 19th Century the "metric system" meant only
length and "weight." (The kilogram was not firmly established as a
unit of mass until 1901.) And this was the era when electricity began
to find wide use. At the Columbian Exhibition of 1893 (a World's Fair
in Chicago), an international conference was held to establish
practical equivalents of the electrical units: the volt, the ampere,
and the ohm. Congress liked the result, and wrote into law the
conference's definitions of the volt, the ampere, and the ohm.
There was rapid progress in electrical technology in the early 20th
century, and by the early 1920's, much more precise ways had been
developed to measure the three units. The Treaty of the Meter was
formally amended to bring the electrical units under its umbrella. But
now we had a problem. Since all three units were defined by U.S. law,
and since the 1893 "practical equivalents" could be measured to
greater precision and accuracy, Ohm's Law was illegal by act of
Congress.
This is what Congress set about to fix in 1948. In the law about
electrical units, it stripped out the obsolete 1893 definitions and
left a nearly empty shell, saying things like "the ohm is the unit of
electrical resistance." (Like what other alternative was there?) Since
it was so clear at the time why defining units in law was a bad idea,
you have to wonder why they used the occassion to ADD the definition
of the candela. (Did they think it would never change?)
Anyway, all of this 1948 junk -- the candela definition and the
leftovers from 1893 -- is now gone. It's all just SI now -- volts,
ohms, ampere, candelas, and everything else. And the updated Metric
Act covers all of it.
- Jonathan
|
| |
Date: 22 Aug 2007 12:43:05
From: oriel36
Subject: Re: zone time in U.S. now based on UTC
|
On Aug 21, 7:03 pm, dkel...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Aug 20, 10:49 am,oriel36<geraldkelle...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> ---snip---
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > For some unknown and hard to fathom reason,you jokers have decided to
> > go along with an idea that the noon cycle is 24 hours in order to
> > justify why a star returns to a meridian in 23 hours 56 minutes 04
> > seconds and from their to this idiotic notion of 'leap seconds' tied
> > to axial rotation.
>
> > > The Earth is slowing down and when people first started using time
> > > for purposes other than keeping track of when to go to work, they
> > > came on this problem.
>
> > Is there some mass indoctrination that renders really distinguished
> > principles such as the creation of the 24 hour day into rubbish like
> > that statement.It must be something else to convince yourself of a
> > cult belief such as this when the actual treatise which determines how
> > to use clocks,terrestrial longitudes and the daily cycle as a 24 hour/
> > 360 degree equivalency based on 4 minutes for each degree of
> > geographical seperation -
>
> It really makes little difference if you use sidereal time or solar
> day
> to define 24 hours.
Many indoctrinated people like you exist because the basic principles
of how the 24 hour day is created from the natural noon cycle are
unknown to you.Even when the great work of Huygens which shows how the
Equation of Time correction acts like a daily 'leap' correction to
keep 24 hour clock noon fixed to natural noon,you either cannot grasp
it or do not wish to -
http://www.xs4all.nl/~adcs/Huygens/06/kort-E.html
When genuine astronomers come to understand that the really
distinguished principles which allow one 24 hour day to elapse
seamlessly into the next 24 hour day,it provides the basic correlation
betwen clocks and terrestrial geometry where one degree of terrestrial
longitude represents 4 minutes of clock time making 24 hours/360
degrees.
My astronomical ancestors never linked the standard pace of a clock
directly to axial rotation,they simply exploited the Equation of Time
feature which allows one 24 hour day to elapse into the next 24 hour
day and transfered the 'average' into terrestrial longitudes and the
axial cycle as a constant.There is never more or less 360 degrees from
location around to location and never 24 hours difference when
expressed in clock time.
The fact is that the earth does not rotate at a
> nice
> constant rate relative to anything, stars, sun, planets or anything
> else.
It is unfortunate for you that your 'leap second' is based on the
principle that the Earth rotates to noon in 24 hours,the stars in 23
hours 56 minutes 04 seconds with the 3 minutes 56 second difference
shoved into orbital motion -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sidereal_time
I would probably call attention to the graphic which explicitly shows
the noon cycles are shown as 24 hours exactly but I realise who I am
dealing with and it would be of little use.
> The Earth is not a good clock. The requirements of time keeping have
> pushed beyond what the rotation of the Earth is able to keep up with.
Accurate clocks were invented to match the astronomical principles
behind the 24 hour day,not the other way around, geometry,
geography , a little intelligence and a healthy appreciation of what
our astronomical ancestors did keeps the greatest of human
achievement's stable.Most take the 24 hour day,and subsequently
equable hours,minutes ,seconds and smaller divisions so much for
granted that they do not realise that it was all developed by
briilliant men.
> If we'd selected sidereal days, we'd still need leap seconds.
> Get used to it.
> Dwight- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
The choice before genuine people is whether to accept the awful error
by John Flamsteed in creating a myth- that there is a solar day,a
sidereal day and there is a natural division between them expressed as
the value of 23 hours 56 minutes 04 seconds,something now promoted as
mainstream doctrine -
http://hypertextbook.com/facts/1999/JennyChen.shtml
The matter should be dealt with in an appropriate way however the
politics which support the pretension of 'leap seconds' allied to
axial rotation is far more dominant presently,even if it is fairly
easy to get of using the texts of people like Huygens in
astronomy,Harrison in respect to chronometers for finding
longitude,Copernicus in respect to showing the daily cycle,the
ancients in respect to the variations in the noon cycle and the
Equation of Time.
When you learn about the leap second correction known as the Equation
of Time you will enter a lost astronomical world full of riches.,I
assure you of that -
http://www.xs4all.nl/~adcs/Huygens/06/kort-E.html
|
| |
Date: 21 Aug 2007 14:22:12
From:
Subject: Re: zone time in U.S. now based on UTC
|
Davoud wrote:
>Would you be kind enough to cite at least a few of those laws
Federal laws mandate the use of non-metric units in supermarkets:
The Fair Packaging and Labeling Act
http://www.ftc.gov/os/statutes/fpla/outline.html
See what Proctor&Gamble says about it:
http://ts.nist.gov/WeightsAndMeasures/Metric/upload/guaypg1102.pdf
|
| |
Date: 21 Aug 2007 11:03:46
From:
Subject: Re: zone time in U.S. now based on UTC
|
On Aug 20, 10:49 am, oriel36 <geraldkelle...@yahoo.com > wrote:
---snip---
>
> For some unknown and hard to fathom reason,you jokers have decided to
> go along with an idea that the noon cycle is 24 hours in order to
> justify why a star returns to a meridian in 23 hours 56 minutes 04
> seconds and from their to this idiotic notion of 'leap seconds' tied
> to axial rotation.
>
> > The Earth is slowing down and when people first started using time
> > for purposes other than keeping track of when to go to work, they
> > came on this problem.
>
> Is there some mass indoctrination that renders really distinguished
> principles such as the creation of the 24 hour day into rubbish like
> that statement.It must be something else to convince yourself of a
> cult belief such as this when the actual treatise which determines how
> to use clocks,terrestrial longitudes and the daily cycle as a 24 hour/
> 360 degree equivalency based on 4 minutes for each degree of
> geographical seperation -
It really makes little difference if you use sidereal time or solar
day
to define 24 hours. The fact is that the earth does not rotate at a
nice
constant rate relative to anything, stars, sun, planets or anything
else.
The Earth is not a good clock. The requirements of time keeping have
pushed beyond what the rotation of the Earth is able to keep up with.
If we'd selected sidereal days, we'd still need leap seconds.
Get used to it.
Dwight
|
| |
Date: 20 Aug 2007 11:54:58
From: oriel36
Subject: Re: zone time in U.S. now based on UTC
|
On Aug 20, 7:32 pm, Stefano MacGregor <esperant...@yahoo.com > wrote:
> Paul Hirose skribis:
>
> > A few days ago the President signed legislation which, among
> > other things, amended existing law to define the U.S. time zones in
> > terms of UTC instead of mean solar time.
>
> Okay, so we're finally getting in step with the rest of the civilized
> world. This is a good thing. Next, we may remove all of the laws
> that prevent people from fully implementing the metric system. That
> will be a good thing, too.
>
> --
> Stefano
> \\
|
| |
Date: 20 Aug 2007 11:32:40
From: Stefano MacGregor
Subject: Re: zone time in U.S. now based on UTC
|
Paul Hirose skribis:
> A few days ago the President signed legislation which, among
> other things, amended existing law to define the U.S. time zones in
> terms of UTC instead of mean solar time.
Okay, so we're finally getting in step with the rest of the civilized
world. This is a good thing. Next, we may remove all of the laws
that prevent people from fully implementing the metric system. That
will be a good thing, too.
--
Stefano
\\
|
| |
Date: 20 Aug 2007 10:49:31
From: oriel36
Subject: Re: zone time in U.S. now based on UTC
|
I apologise insofar as I have to pretend that you know what you are
talking about.
On Aug 20, 6:01 pm, dkel...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Aug 20, 4:43 am, oriel36 <geraldkelle...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> ---snip---
>
>
>
> > Who will be the first to bring this serious matter out in the open ?.I
> > assure them that humanity will be entirely relieved and indeed
> > thrilled to discover the great principles which create the 24 hour
> > day,the calendar system and the later developments such as the
> > correelation between clocks and terrestrial longitudes at 4 minutes
> > for each degree of geographical seperation.A complete seperation is
> > required to break the astrological stranglehold introduced unwittingly
> > by the substandard reasoning of Flamsteed and no attempt is made to
> > conceal the error which tries to fit 4 annual orbital cycles of the
> > Earth into a calendar system made up of 3 years of 365 days and 1 year
> > of 366 days.
>
> Hi
> The real problem is that time has many purposes. Keeping track of
> that period called the day is only the simplest of these purposes.
The equal or mean 24 hour day represents a standard pace which
timekeeping astronomers developed to allow one noon cycle to mesh with
the next noon cycle,in short,the 24 hour day and subsequently equable
hours,minutes,seconds or smaller division are a human creation by
virtue of the face that the natural noon cycle is unequal -
"...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. " Huygens
For some unknown and hard to fathom reason,you jokers have decided to
go along with an idea that the noon cycle is 24 hours in order to
justify why a star returns to a meridian in 23 hours 56 minutes 04
seconds and from their to this idiotic notion of 'leap seconds' tied
to axial rotation.
> The Earth is slowing down and when people first started using time
> for purposes other than keeping track of when to go to work, they
> came on this problem.
Is there some mass indoctrination that renders really distinguished
principles such as the creation of the 24 hour day into rubbish like
that statement.It must be something else to convince yourself of a
cult belief such as this when the actual treatise which determines how
to use clocks,terrestrial longitudes and the daily cycle as a 24 hour/
360 degree equivalency based on 4 minutes for each degree of
geographical seperation -
http://www.xs4all.nl/~adcs/Huygens/06/kort-E.html
Obviously nobody has any intention of reading that sublime
astronomical work which is the first real time the heliocentric
adaption of the Equation of Time system to terrestrial longitudes is
laid out in such a wonderful and easy to understand way.
> Many of the other purposes of time require that it does no vary
> relative
> to the rest of the physical phenomena that seems to have more long
> term stability than the rotation of the Earth.
The joke is on you sunshine,when the heliocentric astronomers such as
Huygens overlaid the Equation of Time system for the purpose of
determining geographical location on Earth via terrestrial
longitudes,they never required the standard pace of the hours,minutes
and seconds be linked directly to the Earth's rotation.The transfer of
the human devised equable 24 hour day to the daily cycle remains just
a convenient principle,the average 24 hour day just transfered to a
constant axial cycle and no external reference is required ,that is
what makes the system so stable for century after century.
> Bickering over errors made by earlier people such as Flamsteed
> serve no useful purposes.
> Get over it.
> Dwight
Who is bickering,very foolish people believe that they can justify the
motions of the Earth through the return of a star to a meridian in 23
hours 56 minutes 04 seconds or rather,state that they link axial
rotation directly to that value -
'Period Of Rotation'
"The actual value is 23 hours, 56 minutes and 4 seconds. This is the
length of a "sidereal" day. It is the actual time it takes the Earth
to rotate 360 degrees. The term "sidereal" (pronounced sigh-dear'-
real) refers to the rotation of the Earth being measured relative to
the stars. There ARE 24 hours in a "solar day". This is the time it
takes from one noon (sun overhead) to the next noon. The difference in
the two "days" arises from the fact that during a day the Earth also
travels nearly a degree further on its yearly trek around the Sun."
http://liftoff.msfc.nasa.gov/academy/rocket_sci/orbmech/period.html
Maybe I should remind you of the words of Huygens in contrast to the
dumb,and prevelent ,statement from Nasa before you dare respond -
"...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. " Huygens
There is nothing remotely close to the tragedy which began with a
terrible mistake by Flamsteed,passed through the awful agenda of
Newton and the exotic 20th century concepts and now surfaces as 'leap
seconds'.Thankfully the error is now out in the open with genuine
astronomer capable of seeing how their ancestors,both structural and
timekeeping,developed the clock system in tandem with the axial cycle
and terrestrial longitudes.Children can now easily admire how the
principle which keeps one 24 hour day rolling into the next is used as
the basis for 1 degree of geographical seperation for every 4 minutes
of clock time,,a principle that has not changed from the original
pendulum clocks of Huygens through John Harrison's great chronometers
to the GPS system.
Get over it indeed ! ,that luxury is not yours for it truly belongs to
the distinguished and careful astronomers.
|
| |
Date: 20 Aug 2007 10:01:29
From:
Subject: Re: zone time in U.S. now based on UTC
|
On Aug 20, 4:43 am, oriel36 <geraldkelle...@yahoo.com > wrote:
---snip---
>
> Who will be the first to bring this serious matter out in the open ?.I
> assure them that humanity will be entirely relieved and indeed
> thrilled to discover the great principles which create the 24 hour
> day,the calendar system and the later developments such as the
> correelation between clocks and terrestrial longitudes at 4 minutes
> for each degree of geographical seperation.A complete seperation is
> required to break the astrological stranglehold introduced unwittingly
> by the substandard reasoning of Flamsteed and no attempt is made to
> conceal the error which tries to fit 4 annual orbital cycles of the
> Earth into a calendar system made up of 3 years of 365 days and 1 year
> of 366 days.
Hi
The real problem is that time has many purposes. Keeping track of
that period called the day is only the simplest of these purposes.
The Earth is slowing down and when people first started using time
for purposes other than keeping track of when to go to work, they
came on this problem.
Many of the other purposes of time require that it does no vary
relative
to the rest of the physical phenomena that seems to have more long
term stability than the rotation of the Earth.
Bickering over errors made by earlier people such as Flamsteed
serve no useful purposes.
Get over it.
Dwight
|
| |
Date: 20 Aug 2007 04:43:30
From: oriel36
Subject: Re: zone time in U.S. now based on UTC
|
On Aug 20, 12:09 am, sla29...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Aug 19, 11:53 am, n07W33+mg...@cl.cam.ac.uk (Markus Kuhn) wrote:
>
> > Is this move perhaps a prelude to the next phase in the ongoing
> > campaign to abolish leap seconds and thereby fully decouple UTC
> > from mean solar time (and UT)?
>
> Not according to one who was working on putting the language into the
> bills over the past few years. On the other hand, that one was
> completely unaware of the fact that leap seconds and POSIX give system
> implementors grief.
> That could be plausible deniability, but unless proven so would be
> much more simply explained by the need for a lot more pedagogy on the
> subject of leap seconds.
The whole spectre of 'leap seconds' is the product of destructive
thinking which can be traced to a single sourse -
"... 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
The difference between the daily noon cycle and tyhe 24 hour clock
cycle absolutely excludes the idea that an external reference such as
the return of a star to a meridian can be used to determine the axial
rotation of the Earth,'leap seconds' are ,of course,derived from the
false principle introduced centuries ago.Simply dropping any reference
to the distant stars in respect to the 24 hour day,clocks and the
daily cycle is enough to abolish the destructive reasoning introduced
by Flamsteed.
What person here cannot reason how the 24 hours of Monday elapse into
the 24 hours of Tuesday as a product of the Equation of Time system
which in itself is one of humanity's greatest achievements.As the
variations in length of the noon cycle was recognised millenia ago,why
should it be so difficult for contemporaries to recognise that the
Equation of Time correction acts like a daily 'leap' correction to
keep the 24 hour cycle fixed to natural noon just as Huygen's treatise
explicitly states ? -
http://www.xs4all.nl/~adcs/Huygens/06/kort-E.html
Why the burning desire to stick with a correlation which ties axial
and orbital motion to the return of a star to a meridian by believing
that the noon cycle is 24 hours exactly in order to shove the 3
minutes 56 seconds difference in the return of a star into the
orbital motion of the Earth ? -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sidereal_time
What can be said of the 'higher' institutions which knowingly support
the astrological core of the 'sidereal day' principles which have no
basis in observation and for a crowd that talks about physiucal
evidence as the only evidence that matters ,to believe in a physically
observed 24 hour cycle is the lowest level to which astronomers or any
individual in the matter can fall.
Who will be the first to bring this serious matter out in the open ?.I
assure them that humanity will be entirely relieved and indeed
thrilled to discover the great principles which create the 24 hour
day,the calendar system and the later developments such as the
correelation between clocks and terrestrial longitudes at 4 minutes
for each degree of geographical seperation.A complete seperation is
required to break the astrological stranglehold introduced unwittingly
by the substandard reasoning of Flamsteed and no attempt is made to
conceal the error which tries to fit 4 annual orbital cycles of the
Earth into a calendar system made up of 3 years of 365 days and 1 year
of 366 days.
|
| |
Date: 19 Aug 2007 23:09:04
From:
Subject: Re: zone time in U.S. now based on UTC
|
On Aug 19, 11:53 am, n07W33+mg...@cl.cam.ac.uk (Markus Kuhn) wrote:
> Is this move perhaps a prelude to the next phase in the ongoing
> campaign to abolish leap seconds and thereby fully decouple UTC
> from mean solar time (and UT)?
Not according to one who was working on putting the language into the
bills over the past few years. On the other hand, that one was
completely unaware of the fact that leap seconds and POSIX give system
implementors grief.
That could be plausible deniability, but unless proven so would be
much more simply explained by the need for a lot more pedagogy on the
subject of leap seconds.
|
| |
Date: 19 Aug 2007 12:51:56
From: oriel36
Subject: Re: zone time in U.S. now based on UTC
|
On Aug 19, 7:53 pm, n07W33+mg...@cl.cam.ac.uk (Markus Kuhn) wrote:
> "Paul Hirose" <jvcmz89...@earINVALIDthlink.net> writes:
>
>
|
| |
Date: 19 Aug 2007 18:53:35
From: Markus Kuhn
Subject: Re: zone time in U.S. now based on UTC
|
"Paul Hirose" <jvcmz89uwf@earINVALIDthlink.net > writes:
|
|
