Clocks going back this weekend?
Oct 25th 2004, 6:05 am
#91
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Clocks going back this weekend?
On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 19:24:23 +0200, Mxsmanic <[email protected]>
wrote:
>[email protected] writes:
>> Isn't the atomic clock always on UTC?
>Atomic clocks can be set to anything. So-called atomic time is TAI, but
>it's not the same thing as an atomic clock, nor is it the same thing as
>UTC (TAI is unadjusted for irregularities in the Earth's rotation,
>whereas UTC is).
Public atomic clocks used as a reference cannot be set to anything.
--
Martin
wrote:
>[email protected] writes:
>> Isn't the atomic clock always on UTC?
>Atomic clocks can be set to anything. So-called atomic time is TAI, but
>it's not the same thing as an atomic clock, nor is it the same thing as
>UTC (TAI is unadjusted for irregularities in the Earth's rotation,
>whereas UTC is).
Public atomic clocks used as a reference cannot be set to anything.
--
Martin
Oct 25th 2004, 6:08 am
#92
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Clocks going back this weekend?
[email protected] writes:
> Public atomic clocks used as a reference cannot be set to anything.
There are no public atomic clocks, per se. "Atomic clocks" are in fact
frequency standards, and are part of a chain of devices used to
determine the correct time with a high degree of accuracy. Public
exposure of the chain is limited to the final time result, as a general
rule.
--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.
> Public atomic clocks used as a reference cannot be set to anything.
There are no public atomic clocks, per se. "Atomic clocks" are in fact
frequency standards, and are part of a chain of devices used to
determine the correct time with a high degree of accuracy. Public
exposure of the chain is limited to the final time result, as a general
rule.
--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.
Oct 25th 2004, 6:09 am
#93
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Clocks going back this weekend?
On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 19:24:54 +0200, Mxsmanic <[email protected]>
wrote:
>[email protected] writes:
>> Atomic clocks don't indicate changes from summer
>> time to winter time.
>Atomic clocks indicate whatever they are told to indicate.
in the case we are discussing it is using an atomic clock as a
reference for the time in a PC.
Having said that Bill Gates provides a user modifiable table in Win
XP/NT to define when summer time/winter time starts are you now
saying that he wasted his time because atomic clocks provide the same
info?
--
Martin
wrote:
>[email protected] writes:
>> Atomic clocks don't indicate changes from summer
>> time to winter time.
>Atomic clocks indicate whatever they are told to indicate.
in the case we are discussing it is using an atomic clock as a
reference for the time in a PC.
Having said that Bill Gates provides a user modifiable table in Win
XP/NT to define when summer time/winter time starts are you now
saying that he wasted his time because atomic clocks provide the same
info?
--
Martin
Oct 25th 2004, 6:10 am
#94
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Clocks going back this weekend?
On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 11:41:20 +0000 (UTC), "Alan Harrison"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>"Hatunen" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected].. .
>> Of course, since it's light an hour later each evening, it's also
>> dark an hour later each morning, so in the autumn the local
>> newspaper showed high school kids waiting for a school bus out
>> near the edge of town and lighting a fire "to keep the coyotes
>> away".
>Another reason for lighting a fire might be to keep warm!
It was meant as a joke. But in fact, it is normally coldest just
after sunrise.
************* DAVE HATUNEN ([email protected]) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
<[email protected]> wrote:
>"Hatunen" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected].. .
>> Of course, since it's light an hour later each evening, it's also
>> dark an hour later each morning, so in the autumn the local
>> newspaper showed high school kids waiting for a school bus out
>> near the edge of town and lighting a fire "to keep the coyotes
>> away".
>Another reason for lighting a fire might be to keep warm!
It was meant as a joke. But in fact, it is normally coldest just
after sunrise.
************* DAVE HATUNEN ([email protected]) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
Oct 25th 2004, 6:13 am
#95
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Clocks going back this weekend?
On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 18:33:26 +0200, [email protected] wrote:
>On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 18:27:55 +0200, Mxsmanic <[email protected]>
>wrote:
>>Magda writes:
>>> No one advocates all-year-round winter time ?
>>People who actually understand time and the movement of the Earth are
>>likely to advocate fixed time all year round.
>Who for example?
All of China is on a single time zone; do the Chinese use
daylight time?
In any case, we here in Arizona are on "winter time", i.e.,
standard time, year-round (outside the navajo nation, anyway).
************* DAVE HATUNEN ([email protected]) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
>On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 18:27:55 +0200, Mxsmanic <[email protected]>
>wrote:
>>Magda writes:
>>> No one advocates all-year-round winter time ?
>>People who actually understand time and the movement of the Earth are
>>likely to advocate fixed time all year round.
>Who for example?
All of China is on a single time zone; do the Chinese use
daylight time?
In any case, we here in Arizona are on "winter time", i.e.,
standard time, year-round (outside the navajo nation, anyway).
************* DAVE HATUNEN ([email protected]) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
Oct 25th 2004, 6:21 am
#96
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Clocks going back this weekend?
On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 20:08:16 +0200, Mxsmanic
<[email protected]> wrote:
>[email protected] writes:
>> Public atomic clocks used as a reference cannot be set to anything.
>There are no public atomic clocks, per se. "Atomic clocks" are in fact
>frequency standards, and are part of a chain of devices used to
>determine the correct time with a high degree of accuracy. Public
>exposure of the chain is limited to the final time result, as a general
>rule.
But to avoid being overpedantic, it should be pointed out that a
pendulum clock is also a frequency standard. Time readouts are a
consequence of the interface used.
************* DAVE HATUNEN ([email protected]) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
<[email protected]> wrote:
>[email protected] writes:
>> Public atomic clocks used as a reference cannot be set to anything.
>There are no public atomic clocks, per se. "Atomic clocks" are in fact
>frequency standards, and are part of a chain of devices used to
>determine the correct time with a high degree of accuracy. Public
>exposure of the chain is limited to the final time result, as a general
>rule.
But to avoid being overpedantic, it should be pointed out that a
pendulum clock is also a frequency standard. Time readouts are a
consequence of the interface used.
************* DAVE HATUNEN ([email protected]) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
Oct 25th 2004, 6:22 am
#97
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Clocks going back this weekend?
On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 19:24:54 +0200, Mxsmanic
<[email protected]> wrote:
>[email protected] writes:
>> Atomic clocks don't indicate changes from summer
>> time to winter time.
>Atomic clocks indicate whatever they are told to indicate.
That's all any clock does.
************* DAVE HATUNEN ([email protected]) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
<[email protected]> wrote:
>[email protected] writes:
>> Atomic clocks don't indicate changes from summer
>> time to winter time.
>Atomic clocks indicate whatever they are told to indicate.
That's all any clock does.
************* DAVE HATUNEN ([email protected]) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
Oct 25th 2004, 6:43 am
#98
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Clocks going back this weekend?
On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 20:08:16 +0200, Mxsmanic <[email protected]>
wrote:
> Public
>exposure of the chain is limited to the final time result, as a general
>rule.
.... except when it is not?
--
Martin
wrote:
> Public
>exposure of the chain is limited to the final time result, as a general
>rule.
.... except when it is not?
--
Martin
Oct 25th 2004, 7:31 am
#99
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Clocks going back this weekend?
<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 10:00:43 +0000 (UTC), "Alan Harrison"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> ><[email protected]> wrote in message
> >news:[email protected].. .
> >
> >> Statistics were quoted about the potential reduction in child road
> >> accident fatalities.
> >
> >But when it was tried around 1970, there was no actual reduction.
> Can you quote a source for that?
No. Just mentioned in the paper (probably Guardian or Observer) some years
ago in an article on the subject.
> You might have noticed that traffic conditions are not the same as in
> 1970.
No, they are not, but the basic issue hasn't changed. Just as in 1970,
observing summer time in winter would mean more traffic movement before
sunrise, with concominant cold-related hazards (black ice, night fog not
lifted, etc). Advocates of change have sometimes argued that kids are at
less risk in the morning (going directly to school) than they would be in
the evening (when they may go to the shops or a friend's house) and
therefore that darkness in the morning is less problematic. There isn't any
evidence from the earlier experiment to confirm the safety claims.
One major aspect of changes in traffic conditions is, in any case, the now
much more frequent practice of taking children to school by car. Parents,
for various reasons, are now much less willing than they used to be to send
their kids to school on their own.
Alan Harrison
news:[email protected]...
> On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 10:00:43 +0000 (UTC), "Alan Harrison"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> ><[email protected]> wrote in message
> >news:[email protected].. .
> >
> >> Statistics were quoted about the potential reduction in child road
> >> accident fatalities.
> >
> >But when it was tried around 1970, there was no actual reduction.
> Can you quote a source for that?
No. Just mentioned in the paper (probably Guardian or Observer) some years
ago in an article on the subject.
> You might have noticed that traffic conditions are not the same as in
> 1970.
No, they are not, but the basic issue hasn't changed. Just as in 1970,
observing summer time in winter would mean more traffic movement before
sunrise, with concominant cold-related hazards (black ice, night fog not
lifted, etc). Advocates of change have sometimes argued that kids are at
less risk in the morning (going directly to school) than they would be in
the evening (when they may go to the shops or a friend's house) and
therefore that darkness in the morning is less problematic. There isn't any
evidence from the earlier experiment to confirm the safety claims.
One major aspect of changes in traffic conditions is, in any case, the now
much more frequent practice of taking children to school by car. Parents,
for various reasons, are now much less willing than they used to be to send
their kids to school on their own.
Alan Harrison
Oct 25th 2004, 7:36 am
#100
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Clocks going back this weekend?
On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 12:22:14 -0600, Hatunen <[email protected]> wrote:
>On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 19:24:54 +0200, Mxsmanic
><[email protected]> wrote:
>>[email protected] writes:
>>> Atomic clocks don't indicate changes from summer
>>> time to winter time.
>>Atomic clocks indicate whatever they are told to indicate.
>That's all any clock does.
That's why I have to move the hour hand by an hour on my watch twice a
year.
--
Martin
>On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 19:24:54 +0200, Mxsmanic
><[email protected]> wrote:
>>[email protected] writes:
>>> Atomic clocks don't indicate changes from summer
>>> time to winter time.
>>Atomic clocks indicate whatever they are told to indicate.
>That's all any clock does.
That's why I have to move the hour hand by an hour on my watch twice a
year.
--
Martin
Oct 25th 2004, 7:48 am
#101
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Clocks going back this weekend?
On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 19:31:59 +0000 (UTC), "Alan Harrison"
<[email protected]> wrote:
><[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected].. .
>> On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 10:00:43 +0000 (UTC), "Alan Harrison"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >
>> ><[email protected]> wrote in message
>> >news:[email protected].. .
>> >
>> >> Statistics were quoted about the potential reduction in child road
>> >> accident fatalities.
>> >
>> >But when it was tried around 1970, there was no actual reduction.
>> Can you quote a source for that?
>No. Just mentioned in the paper (probably Guardian or Observer) some years
>ago in an article on the subject.
It contradicts what was said on BBC R4 a few days ago.
http://newswww.bbc.net.uk/1/hi/talki...nt/3736122.stm
"An MP is calling on the Commons to let the different nations of the
UK decide independently whether to put the clocks back in the autumn.
Nigel Beard points to official figures which he says show that, if
summer time was in force all year, fewer people would die on the
roads, because more crashes happen on dark evenings than on dark
mornings.
It could lead to England following continental time, but Scotland and
Northern Ireland would do it if the wish."
Note confusion between "summertime was in force all year" and
"following continental time".
and
http://newswww.bbc.net.uk/1/hi/uk/3732690.stm
"Mr Beard says a compelling reason for changing the clocks is a
government study showing that it would save 100 lives a year on the
roads.
That is because people crash more on dark evenings than on dark
mornings.
Similar research in the 1990s was rejected by the Scottish Secretary
Michael Forsyth, who said Scottish Office statisticians believed the
life-saving benefits only applied to England"
<snip>
"In response to a BBC enquiry a Scottish Executive spokesman said the
executive now accepts that changing the clocks would also save Scots'
lives.
A survey by the safety groups RoSPA earlier this year suggested a
majority of Scots would support changing the clocks if they knew about
the savings."
>> You might have noticed that traffic conditions are not the same as in
>> 1970.
>No, they are not, but the basic issue hasn't changed. Just as in 1970,
>observing summer time in winter would mean more traffic movement before
>sunrise, with concominant cold-related hazards (black ice, night fog not
>lifted, etc). Advocates of change have sometimes argued that kids are at
>less risk in the morning (going directly to school) than they would be in
>the evening (when they may go to the shops or a friend's house) and
>therefore that darkness in the morning is less problematic. There isn't any
>evidence from the earlier experiment to confirm the safety claims.
Until you quote a source there is no evidence.
I've searched without success, I'd be interested if you could locate a
source.
>One major aspect of changes in traffic conditions is, in any case, the now
>much more frequent practice of taking children to school by car. Parents,
>for various reasons, are now much less willing than they used to be to send
>their kids to school on their own.
Got to have some excuse to own a gas guzzling 4WD?
--
Martin
<[email protected]> wrote:
><[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected].. .
>> On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 10:00:43 +0000 (UTC), "Alan Harrison"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >
>> ><[email protected]> wrote in message
>> >news:[email protected].. .
>> >
>> >> Statistics were quoted about the potential reduction in child road
>> >> accident fatalities.
>> >
>> >But when it was tried around 1970, there was no actual reduction.
>> Can you quote a source for that?
>No. Just mentioned in the paper (probably Guardian or Observer) some years
>ago in an article on the subject.
It contradicts what was said on BBC R4 a few days ago.
http://newswww.bbc.net.uk/1/hi/talki...nt/3736122.stm
"An MP is calling on the Commons to let the different nations of the
UK decide independently whether to put the clocks back in the autumn.
Nigel Beard points to official figures which he says show that, if
summer time was in force all year, fewer people would die on the
roads, because more crashes happen on dark evenings than on dark
mornings.
It could lead to England following continental time, but Scotland and
Northern Ireland would do it if the wish."
Note confusion between "summertime was in force all year" and
"following continental time".
and
http://newswww.bbc.net.uk/1/hi/uk/3732690.stm
"Mr Beard says a compelling reason for changing the clocks is a
government study showing that it would save 100 lives a year on the
roads.
That is because people crash more on dark evenings than on dark
mornings.
Similar research in the 1990s was rejected by the Scottish Secretary
Michael Forsyth, who said Scottish Office statisticians believed the
life-saving benefits only applied to England"
<snip>
"In response to a BBC enquiry a Scottish Executive spokesman said the
executive now accepts that changing the clocks would also save Scots'
lives.
A survey by the safety groups RoSPA earlier this year suggested a
majority of Scots would support changing the clocks if they knew about
the savings."
>> You might have noticed that traffic conditions are not the same as in
>> 1970.
>No, they are not, but the basic issue hasn't changed. Just as in 1970,
>observing summer time in winter would mean more traffic movement before
>sunrise, with concominant cold-related hazards (black ice, night fog not
>lifted, etc). Advocates of change have sometimes argued that kids are at
>less risk in the morning (going directly to school) than they would be in
>the evening (when they may go to the shops or a friend's house) and
>therefore that darkness in the morning is less problematic. There isn't any
>evidence from the earlier experiment to confirm the safety claims.
Until you quote a source there is no evidence.
I've searched without success, I'd be interested if you could locate a
source.
>One major aspect of changes in traffic conditions is, in any case, the now
>much more frequent practice of taking children to school by car. Parents,
>for various reasons, are now much less willing than they used to be to send
>their kids to school on their own.
Got to have some excuse to own a gas guzzling 4WD?
--
Martin
Oct 25th 2004, 9:06 am
#102
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Clocks going back this weekend?
Hatunen <[email protected]> wrote:
> All of China is on a single time zone; do the Chinese use
> daylight time?
Nope.
miguel
--
Hit The Road! Photos from 32 countries on 5 continents: http://travel.u.nu
> All of China is on a single time zone; do the Chinese use
> daylight time?
Nope.
miguel
--
Hit The Road! Photos from 32 countries on 5 continents: http://travel.u.nu
Oct 25th 2004, 9:21 am
#103
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Clocks going back this weekend?
"Miguel Cruz" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Hatunen <[email protected]> wrote:
>> All of China is on a single time zone; do the Chinese use
>> daylight time?
> Nope.
> miguel
> --
> Hit The Road! Photos from 32 countries on 5 continents: http://travel.u.nu
This thread has been going on for so long that it may be worth mentioning that,
in Western Europe and North America, the clocks DO go back this weekend.
JohnT
news:[email protected]...
> Hatunen <[email protected]> wrote:
>> All of China is on a single time zone; do the Chinese use
>> daylight time?
> Nope.
> miguel
> --
> Hit The Road! Photos from 32 countries on 5 continents: http://travel.u.nu
This thread has been going on for so long that it may be worth mentioning that,
in Western Europe and North America, the clocks DO go back this weekend.
JohnT
Oct 25th 2004, 1:44 pm
#104
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Clocks going back this weekend?
[email protected] writes:
> Having said that Bill Gates provides a user modifiable table in Win
> XP/NT to define when summer time/winter time starts are you now
> saying that he wasted his time because atomic clocks provide the same
> info?
Atomic clocks don't provide information on daylight saving time.
--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.
> Having said that Bill Gates provides a user modifiable table in Win
> XP/NT to define when summer time/winter time starts are you now
> saying that he wasted his time because atomic clocks provide the same
> info?
Atomic clocks don't provide information on daylight saving time.
--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.
Oct 25th 2004, 1:44 pm
#105
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Clocks going back this weekend?
[email protected] writes:
> That's why I have to move the hour hand by an hour on my watch twice a
> year.
Buy a Casio Waveceptor. They are not expensive and they never have to
be set.
--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.
> That's why I have to move the hour hand by an hour on my watch twice a
> year.
Buy a Casio Waveceptor. They are not expensive and they never have to
be set.
--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.
