Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Monday June 29 2015, @10:35PM   Printer-friendly
from the hang-on-a-second dept.

Mainly due to the slowing down of earth rotation, it is about time to add another (the 35th) leap second to UTC in order to keep its time of day close to the mean solar time. NASA features an explanation of why the leap seconds have to be inserted, how earth rotation can be measured precisely and why it is impossible to give precise predictions on when the next one will happen.

The length of day is influenced by many factors, mainly the atmosphere over periods less than a year. Our seasonal and daily weather variations can affect the length of day by a few milliseconds over a year. Other contributors to this variation include dynamics of the Earth's inner core (over long time periods), variations in the atmosphere and oceans, groundwater, and ice storage (over time periods of months to decades), and oceanic and atmospheric tides. Atmospheric variations due to El Niño can cause Earth's rotation to slow down, increasing the length of day by as much as 1 millisecond, or a thousandth of a second.

VLBI [Very Long Baseline Interferometry] tracks these short- and long-term variations by using global networks of stations to observe astronomical objects called quasars. The quasars serve as reference points that are essentially motionless because they are located billions of light years from Earth. Because the observing stations are spread out across the globe, the signal from a quasar will take longer to reach some stations than others. Scientists can use the small differences in arrival time to determine detailed information about the exact positions of the observing stations, Earth's rotation rate, and our planet's orientation in space.


Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Funny) by e_armadillo on Monday June 29 2015, @10:45PM

    by e_armadillo (3695) on Monday June 29 2015, @10:45PM (#203058)

    I get to sleep in Wednesday!

    --
    "How are we gonna get out of here?" ... "We'll dig our way out!" ... "No, no, dig UP stupid!"
    • (Score: 2) by maxwell demon on Tuesday June 30 2015, @06:29PM

      by maxwell demon (1608) on Tuesday June 30 2015, @06:29PM (#203421) Journal

      Well, probably they added the the leap second so that Greece has a bit more time to pay back its debt.

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
  • (Score: 5, Interesting) by bob_super on Monday June 29 2015, @10:50PM

    by bob_super (1357) on Monday June 29 2015, @10:50PM (#203060)

    Stay away from West-coast highways on Tuesday at 5PM.
    Not only because you should never be on a West Coast highway at 5PM, but because GPS-crash crashes are a spectator sport.

  • (Score: 2) by Non Sequor on Monday June 29 2015, @11:15PM

    by Non Sequor (1005) on Monday June 29 2015, @11:15PM (#203068) Journal

    So what's the goal here? Does maintaining leap seconds keep alignment of GMT noon with the time when the sun is at the highest point in the sky over the prime meridian? Or is it some other synchronization?

    If so, it seems like that synchronization can only be useful for astronomy since everyone's on time zones that leave them out of synch anyway. Why not keep track of the cumulative balance for applications that need it and skip it everywhere else.

    --
    Write your congressman. Tell him he sucks.
    • (Score: 4, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 30 2015, @12:17AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 30 2015, @12:17AM (#203094)

      You are basically correct. You add them for the same reason you add leap days. However, because our lives are now affected by time measurement on the second or sub-second level (e.g., GPS), these seconds do add up. Many things operate on GPS time, which does not include leap seconds, so to convert GPS measurements to UTC, you need to figure in the corresponding amount of leap seconds (I think it is now up to 17 with this). A spacecraft moves quite a bit in orbit in 17 seconds, so if you grabbed imagery off of the ISS and didn't figure in your leap seconds, you'll see a different part of the Earth.

      However, the ITU has been soliciting comments from people who are affected by these leap seconds. A nice summary page of the pros and cons is here [wordpress.com].

      • (Score: 2) by kaszz on Tuesday June 30 2015, @12:27AM

        by kaszz (4211) on Tuesday June 30 2015, @12:27AM (#203099) Journal

        So have one clock time which is UTC that includes leap seconds and other leap stuff. Then another clock time that is strictly time based and that have no synchronization to the Earth specific movements.

        • (Score: 2) by takyon on Tuesday June 30 2015, @12:36AM

          by takyon (881) <takyonNO@SPAMsoylentnews.org> on Tuesday June 30 2015, @12:36AM (#203104) Journal

          Time is relative! Muahahahaha!

          --
          [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
          • (Score: 1) by kazzie on Tuesday June 30 2015, @06:24AM

            by kazzie (5309) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday June 30 2015, @06:24AM (#203196)

            Lunchtime doubly so.

        • (Score: 3, Interesting) by bob_super on Tuesday June 30 2015, @12:38AM

          by bob_super (1357) on Tuesday June 30 2015, @12:38AM (#203105)

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coordinated_Universal_Time [wikipedia.org]
          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Time [wikipedia.org]

          UT1 is continuous and drifts from true noon as the earth slows down. UTC isn't continuous but tracks the earth to less than a second.

          UTC is a royal pain when doing broadcast TV, especially in the US.
          Don't get me started on pre-1972 seconds...

          • (Score: 2) by bob_super on Tuesday June 30 2015, @12:43AM

            by bob_super (1357) on Tuesday June 30 2015, @12:43AM (#203106)

            ARGH!
            Wrong brain, Sorry!

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Atomic_Time [wikipedia.org]

            TAI is continuous, based on "seconds since"
            UT1 is earth rotation

            UTC is based on TAI, such that |UT1-UTC| 1s (leap seconds needed)

            • (Score: 2) by kaszz on Tuesday June 30 2015, @12:50AM

              by kaszz (4211) on Tuesday June 30 2015, @12:50AM (#203110) Journal

              So people should use TAI for GPS and broadcast etc. And UTC for alarm clocks etc. And everybody will be happy?

              • (Score: 2) by bob_super on Tuesday June 30 2015, @12:57AM

                by bob_super (1357) on Tuesday June 30 2015, @12:57AM (#203113)

                In a nutshell, but this perfect world is screwed because humans who only occasionally care for 27 seconds, use machines who always do.
                And instead of going TAI, humans have designed machines who seem to all have a different way to handle UTC leap seconds...

                The most fun part of the dialog when broadcasters were trying to standardize time, is "how does a machine which just rebooted know what the time is". Trust me, it's a whole lot more complex than it sounds.

                • (Score: 2) by TheLink on Tuesday June 30 2015, @08:00AM

                  by TheLink (332) on Tuesday June 30 2015, @08:00AM (#203230) Journal
                  What I want is a UTC-like clock where there aren't any leap seconds at all but synchronization is done by having some seconds taking a bit longer.

                  Most programs can handle that better than they can handle leap seconds - to them it's just like suddenly the CPU got faster - most modern programs should be able to deal with CPUs running faster and slower. Most programs and their use cases can also handle ten different seconds throughout the day each taking 10% longer than it should normally. Or just have 10000 seconds that each take 0.01% longer.

                  Leap seconds are mostly a stupid idea. Who wants their clock to ever show something like "23:59:60" ?
                  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by iwoloschin on Tuesday June 30 2015, @11:07AM

                    by iwoloschin (3863) on Tuesday June 30 2015, @11:07AM (#203265)

                    Are you actually going to notice it showing the extra second? I mean, literally, look away for a second and you miss it!

                  • (Score: 2) by bob_super on Tuesday June 30 2015, @03:23PM

                    by bob_super (1357) on Tuesday June 30 2015, @03:23PM (#203323)

                    > Who wants their clock to ever show something like "23:59:60" ?

                    Someone who likes the idea that the time is right?
                    The Incas had the whole planetary rotation figured out hundreds of years ago. By introducing amazingly better precision in the measurement of time, should we have to give up on the basics?

                • (Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Tuesday June 30 2015, @05:33PM

                  by tangomargarine (667) on Tuesday June 30 2015, @05:33PM (#203383)

                  how does a machine which just rebooted know what the time is". Trust me, it's a whole lot more complex than it sounds.

                  CMOS.

                  --
                  "Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
      • (Score: 2) by Non Sequor on Tuesday June 30 2015, @01:52AM

        by Non Sequor (1005) on Tuesday June 30 2015, @01:52AM (#203132) Journal

        The argument that breaking UTC from UT1 would require changing laws, regulations, and technical specs seems like self inflicted brain damage. All of these things are already overruled by enforcement of a de facto standard through time synchronization mechanisms and they all have to tolerate some drift due to variations in synchronization quality among various parties (or else they must already have some mechanism for policing drift).

        Doesn't the GPS network effectively define its own context specific time scale which should be sufficient relative to the accuracy of its distance coordinates? Skew in time signal between satellites should be independent of the relationship between the satellite timescale and terrestrial timescales, so long as the satellites stay in synch in terms of the time they let treat as elapsed.

        --
        Write your congressman. Tell him he sucks.
        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 30 2015, @06:51PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 30 2015, @06:51PM (#203429)

          You are correct that GPS keeps its own time. It is a continuous counting clock that started in 1980 [nps.edu], and since it uses atomic clocks, it is a pretty nice clock indeed. Because of the ubiquity of GPS, it gives us all a very nice clock in our watches, phones, cars, etc. Anything with a GPS receiver in it automatically becomes a nice clock. However, to be useful, one needs to convert GPS time to UTC, which is where the leap-seconds come in to play.

          Now let's suppose you have a few billion burning a hole in your pocket and you want to go into the space imaging business. You put up some cubesats. They take pictures of the Earth, and time-stamp their images with GPS time, which makes the most sense. Now you need to know where on the Earth you're pointing. You get that from your orbit, which is specified as a Two Line Element (TLE), which is defined at a specific point in time, in GMT. That inexpensive GPS receiver you used on the cubesat had the firmware to convert GPS time properly, but it can't be updated and it will be off by a second the next time a leap second gets added, so you'll need to handle that in ground processing. Or, you do away with the leap seconds so your cubesat now always keeps continuous time, but now you need to work your orbital calculation side. Leap seconds are not really an issue when you're talking about your computer, or phone, or if your car GPS gives you time that is off by a second or two. However, when it comes to things that depend upon precision synchronization, like orbits, it does matter.

      • (Score: 2) by sudo rm -rf on Tuesday June 30 2015, @05:02AM

        by sudo rm -rf (2357) on Tuesday June 30 2015, @05:02AM (#203188) Journal

        Funny, how inconsistent sources are on the total number of leap seconds. If I understand correctly, a total of 35 seconds have already been added, because the first leap second in 1972 was in fact 10 seconds. Ah, Wiki [wikipedia.org] tends to agree.
        At 7.66 km/s the ISS would already be 268 km behind (or ahead?)

  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by NCommander on Tuesday June 30 2015, @12:54AM

    by NCommander (2) Subscriber Badge <michael@casadevall.pro> on Tuesday June 30 2015, @12:54AM (#203112) Homepage Journal

    I'm honestly curious if anything will go BANG on SoylentNews with the leap second. We're using clustering for the database, as well as quite a bit of rewritten code w.r.t timestamps and such. If we unexpectedly go down on the 1st, I'm blaming this.

    --
    Still always moving
    • (Score: 2) by sudo rm -rf on Tuesday June 30 2015, @05:11AM

      by sudo rm -rf (2357) on Tuesday June 30 2015, @05:11AM (#203190) Journal

      I wouldn't worry to much, but if you encounter any problems, I'm sure it would make a nice story!
      BTW, Google [blogspot.se] has come up with it's own solution fo fix the leap seconds, by slowing down server time.

      • (Score: 2) by pkrasimirov on Tuesday June 30 2015, @06:49AM

        by pkrasimirov (3358) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday June 30 2015, @06:49AM (#203207)

        Solaris has this for a long time:

        date(1)

        ...

          -a [ - ] sss.fff

                Slowly adjust the time by sss.fff seconds (fff represents fractions of a second). This adjustment can be positive or negative. The system's clock is sped up or slowed down until it has drifted by the number of seconds specified. Only the super-user may adjust the time.

        https://docs.oracle.com/cd/E19253-01/816-5165/6mbb0m9dc/index.html [oracle.com]

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 30 2015, @07:54AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 30 2015, @07:54AM (#203228)

          From the ntpdate man page: [unix.com]

          OPTIONS
          [...]
           
                 -B     Force the time to always be slewed using the adjtime() system  call,  even  if  the
                    measured    offset    is  greater  than +-128 ms. The default is to step the time using
                    settimeofday() if the offset is greater than +-128 ms. Note that, if the offset  is
                    much  greater  than  +-128 ms in this case, that it can take a long time (hours) to
                    slew the clock to the correct value. During this time, the host should not be  used
                    to synchronize clients.

    • (Score: 3, Informative) by martyb on Tuesday June 30 2015, @08:00AM

      by martyb (76) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday June 30 2015, @08:00AM (#203231) Journal

      Interesting observation! I truly never thought to be concerned for our own systems' stability, even though I was well aware of problems that resulted as a result of the 2012 leap-second. A quick search reveals these nuggets: ‘Leap Second’ Bug Wreaks Havoc Across Web" [wired.com] and Leap second crashes Qantas and leaves passengers stranded [news.com.au].

      Further, adding a leap-second at midnight (so as to minimize potential disruption of people's activities) sounds great, except it is not midnight everywhere at the same time... in fact, it's in the middle of the day for places like Japan so it could have some major impact on, say, stock exchanges and banking.

      --
      Wit is intellect, dancing.
  • (Score: 4, Interesting) by bzipitidoo on Tuesday June 30 2015, @01:06AM

    by bzipitidoo (4388) on Tuesday June 30 2015, @01:06AM (#203115) Journal

    "Scientists don’t know exactly why fewer leap seconds have been needed lately."

    Actually, I've heard one reason why. Gigantic dams, mostly in the northern hemisphere, have impounded so much water in huge reservoirs at relatively high latitudes that the Earth's spin is noticeably affected. The water ultimately comes from the world ocean, which is of course evenly distributed, and is stored closer to Earth's axis of rotation. Due to the conservation of angular momentum, Earth's spin speeds up, just like a figure skater when she pulls in her arms.

    The Chinese might be able to screw up timekeeping just by draining the Three Gorges.

    • (Score: 2) by hubie on Tuesday June 30 2015, @01:31PM

      by hubie (1068) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday June 30 2015, @01:31PM (#203295) Journal

      The dam effect is minimal [nasa.gov]. Earthquakes [nasa.gov] have a much larger effect on the Earth's moment of inertia.

      For what it's worth, the dams are located above sea level so loading them with water moves mass away from the Earth's center of mass and thus slow the Earth rotation.

  • (Score: 2, Funny) by Murdoc on Tuesday June 30 2015, @01:09AM

    by Murdoc (2518) on Tuesday June 30 2015, @01:09AM (#203116)

    John Oliver has you covered:

    http://spendyourleapsecondhere.com/ [spendyourleapsecondhere.com]

    It's a collection of random 1 second videos to entertain you for your extra second. Corny I know, but he's fun.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 30 2015, @07:46AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 30 2015, @07:46AM (#203225)

      How am I supposed to view a full collection of one-second videos if I only get one second to view all of them?

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 30 2015, @01:01PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 30 2015, @01:01PM (#203285)

        How about you open multiple tabs, you sissy

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 30 2015, @05:34PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 30 2015, @05:34PM (#203384)

          Even with multiple tabs open, I can see only one at any time.

          Now multiple windows may work, but only if the collection is very small, because my monitor has only limited space.

    • (Score: 1) by TheUnknownCoder on Tuesday June 30 2015, @01:56PM

      by TheUnknownCoder (2962) on Tuesday June 30 2015, @01:56PM (#203305)

      These are actually pretty good! =)

  • (Score: -1, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 30 2015, @03:33AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 30 2015, @03:33AM (#203172)

    trying to delay Canada Day, slowly moving it closer to your independence day to assimilate us.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 30 2015, @08:17AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 30 2015, @08:17AM (#203236)
    It turns out that when official time was switched from astronomical time to atomic time, the atomic second was slightly miscalibrated. Because of this miscalibration, 26 positive leap seconds have been added since 1972. A proper calibration would have resulted in both positive and negative leap seconds and put the green line on this graph [wikimedia.org] closer to zero.
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 30 2015, @04:37PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 30 2015, @04:37PM (#203360)

      No, you are wrong. Leap seconds are required because the Earth rotation is slowing down. It has nothing to do with atomic clocks.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 30 2015, @05:36PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 30 2015, @05:36PM (#203387)

        They are using the atomic clocks to slow the earth rotation down. It's all a conspiracy to make us work more per day!!!111eleven