From: Bardur A. <oca...@sc...> - 2004-08-11 14:18:12
|
On Wed, Aug 11, 2004 at 02:25:37PM +0100, Richard Jones wrote: > Trouble is ... > > "Seconds" aren't really constant in length (depending on which sort of Well, seconds as measured by atomic clocks should be pretty constant (when the observer and clock are in the same frame of reference), which is the basis for a slightly more stable time measurement than UTC: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Atomic_Time so it might not be entirely hopeless. Any measurement which provides a continuous and monotonously increasing "value of time" should do. But we're getting waaay off-topic here, so I'll just leave it at that. :) > I suspect that we need to wait until someone who really knows about > this sort of thing decides to "scratch an itch" and writes the > definitive specialist library. > Agreed. -- Bardur Arantsson <ba...@im...> <ba...@sc...> - When I get angry, Mr. Bigglesworth gets upset. And when Mr. Bigglesworth gets upset... PEOPLE DIE! Dr. Evil | Austin Powers: Intl. Man of Mystery |