by "Judson McClendon" <judmc@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Mar 24, 2008 at 05:17 AM
<news@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>"Judson McClendon" <ju...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> That might affect the earth's rotation because of conservation of
>> angular momentum, but it wouldn't affect the length of a year.
>
>The length of a *year* is dealt with by means of leap years (i.e. by
>varying the number of days in February), and there is indeed a
>proposal to change the rule governing which years are leap years.
>
>The issue we have been discussing here - that of leap seconds - is
>related to the length of a *day* not of a *year*. Hence the rate of
>earth's rotation is what is im****tant.
You're right, of course. Duh! :-)
--
Judson McClendon judmc@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(remove zero)
Sun Valley Systems http://sunvaley.com
"For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that
whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life."
