End of Leap Seconds Will Give Us Back Some Time

When, in 2035 we ask, "Where did the time go?" we'll have an answer: the International Bureau of Weights and Measures took it.

One second at a time.

Brace yourself, because this is big news: Time is being taken from us by BIPM (which is somehow the acronym for the International Bureau of Weights and Measures in another language). Or time is being taken until 2035.

Because by 2035, the BIPM will stop adding leap seconds to our time as part of their efforts to help us keep pace with the Earth's rotation.

You weren't aware they would stop? Wait, you didn't know that they've been adding leap seconds since the Nixon administration? Neither did I.

Now you know why the past 51 years have felt longer than 51 years. It's been 51 years and 27 seconds.

That's how many times the BIPM has added a leap second to keep our time pieces (watches, clocks, smart phones, sundials, hourglasses) in sync with the Earth. It was seen as a necessary adjustment, because our clocks assume a year is exactly a year, to the second. But like most of us, the Earth occasionally slows down.

As a result, our timepieces get a little ahead of the actual rotation, so we need a "leap second" to allow the Earth to catch up.

It wasn't always that way. In fact, it's a relatively new phenomenon.

In 1972, BIPM began adding a "leap second" occasionally. It was necessary due to the arrival of atomic time pieces, which are so exact that they're the standard for world time. If they're not in sync with the world's rotation, who knows what happens?

If you were paying attention in 1973, you would have realized it. One of the biggest songs of that year was "Midnight Train to Georgia," by Gladys Knight and the Pips. When the song was written (a year earlier), the title was "11:59:59 Train to Georgia." Then a leap second was added and a Grammy Award-winning song was recorded.

The 1972 decision created  a conspiracy theory: That employers convinced the BIPM to add the seconds only during workdays, meaning that since 1972, you've given your employer 27 free seconds. Rounding up, that means if your average salary over that time was $20 (probably unlikely if you started working in 1972, but work with me here), you are owed an extra 15 cents. 

For practical purposes, this only matters in a few places. You might not notice a leap second. Other than Gladys Knight, few others would. But for systems that require an exact, constant, uninterrupted flow of timekeeping, adding a leap second can cause a problem: Satellite navigation. Space travel. Telecommunication. Gladys Knight songs.

Ultimately, after hearing Gladys Knight sing, "12:00:27 a.m. Train to Georgia," earlier this year, the bigwigs at BIPM decided to stop adding leap seconds.

So starting no later than 2035, they won't. Our clocks will slowly get out of sync with the Earth. Every few years, we'll get off by another second.

The expectation is that there will be another way to adjust our timepieces in the future. Maybe we'll wait until it's a full minute. Maybe we'll find a way to otherwise adjust how we track time.

All we know is that a time phenomenon that most of us didn't know existed will stop in the next 12 years.

While it may be a change, there's something to be said about atomic clocks and the BIPM: We're going back to find a simpler place and time (and when he takes that ride, guess who's gonna sit right by his side).

Reach Brad Stanhope at bradstanhope@outlook.com

Simple math shows why Fairfield is in the top 1% of American cities

More popular means better.

That's true of restaurants (McDonald's, which serves 69 million people daily is better than The French Laundry in Yountville, which serves a few dozen). It's true of music ("White Christmas" is the greatest song ever, followed by "Candle in the Wind 1997" by Elton John, because they're the top sellers. No. 3 "In the Summertime" by Mungo Jerry  is better than anything by the Beatles or Mozart or Elvis). It's also true of movies (Sadly, "Avatar" is the greatest movie of all time, but "Jurassic World" is a top-10 all-time movie).

It's also true of cities, which is why Fairfield is so much better than many smaller cities.

Duh.

"Popular" and "population" come from the same word: Pop, which means "better." (Don't check this. Trust me.)

According to 2022 Census data, Fairfield has 119,705 people. Fairfield is the 239th largest city in the United States and the 52nd largest in California.

That means Fairfield is the 239th best city in the United States and the 52nd-best city in California.

Don't blame me, blame math.

While that may not seem great, realize there are more than 100,000 cities in the United States and nearly 500 in California. So Fairfield is in the top half of the top 1% of cities in the United States and in the top 10% of California cities (no surprise: California is the most populated state in the nation, so it's the best.).

Understanding Fairfield is an elite city, based on popularity (the only fair way to rank cities) is fine. But consider some "famous" cities that Fairfield is better than, based on popularity. This is not an exhaustive list, but it's good for context. Four American and one Canadian city that aren't as good as Fairfield because they're not as populated (disagree with me? Blame math!):

Carmel, California. Wow, Carmel has missions! Oh, it's so close to Pebble Beach! Oh, Clint Eastwood was mayor! Well, here's the facts: Carmel has 3,200 people. Measured by population, Fairfield is 37 times better than Carmel.

Woodstock, New York. Home of the famous 1969 music festival (and infamous 1999 attempt to duplicate it), Woodstock has less than 6,000 people. Is it fair that more people know about Woodstock than know about Travis Air Force Base? Not in my America. Fairfield is better than Woodstock.

Gettysburg, Pennsylvania. Site of the famous Civil War battle and Lincoln's speech, Gettysburg is pretty great. But if it was really that great, wouldn't more than 7,000 people live there? Fairfield rules. It's about four score and seven times better than Gettysburg (In this case, don't do the math. Trust me.).

Lake Placid, New York. The site of two Winter Olympics is famous, but big deal! Fairfield hosted the Fairfield Classic bike race in the early 2000s, is the home of the Fairfield Expos baseball team and four high schools that play sports. There are about 2,200 residents in Lake Placid. Sad!

Banff, Alberta. The Canadian city is famous because it's inside Banff National Park. But there are less than 10,000 people, so how great can it be? Banff is inside a national park, Fairfield includes Allan Witt Park. Which is better? Fairfield has 10 times more people. It's better.

For historical context, Babylon was the biggest city in the world in 1200 BC. It's population was 80,000 . . . meaning modern-day Fairfield is nearly 50% better than ancient Babylon.

Fairfielders, be proud! You live in a city that's among the top half of the top 1% in the United States and is better than ancient Babylon.

Reach Brad Stanhope at bradstanhope@outlook.com.

Like I Was Sayin': New leader for 'greatest athlete in Bay Area history' list

For the first time since 1990, there's a new king of Bay Area pro sports history.

Of course, that's not an official title, but any history of who is considered the greatest athlete in Bay Area major sports history would conclude that the greatest was Willie Mays from 1958 (when the Giants moved here) until 1990, when Joe Montana won his third title as the 49ers quarterback. Montana held that crown until this year, when . . . well, read on. With no further introduction, the top 10 athletes (on Bay Area major pro teams) in history:

10. Charles Woodson, Raiders. The Hall of Famer played the first eight and final three years of his NFL career with the Raiders. It wasn't in the Bay Area, but he's also the coolest Heisman Trophy winner in history.

9. Buster Posey, Giants. Upset Giants fans? Well, read the rest of the list and realize No. 9 is pretty good. Posey was the Rookie of the Year, Most Valuable Player and the best offensive player on three World Series champions. What's more, he was the public face of the Giants as they had their greatest period in team history.

8. Ronnie Lott, 49ers. Even critics of the "finesse" 1980s 49ers dynasty acknowledged Lott was intimidating. A brilliant rookie cornerback for the first Super Bowl winners, he became the NFL's most feared safety.

7. Rick Barry, Warrior. When he retired, Barry was one of the 15 greatest NBA players in history. His stature has reduced, but he was a spectacular player who led Golden State to its first championship. Not beloved, but great.

6. Jerry Rice, 49ers. It says something about this region's history that the guy many consider the greatest NFL player doesn't even make the top five. The margin between Rice and the next-best receiver in the NFL was always massive and his prime lasted twice as long as most NFL players.

5. Barry Bonds, Giants. Greatest hitter since at least Ted Williams (maybe ever), he hit for power, average and had arguably the best eye in baseball history. Of course, he got "help" later in his career and a huge cloud hovers over his legacy. But Bonds from 2000 to 2004? Unmatched.

4. Rickey Henderson, A's. Yes, I have him above Bonds. Rickey played 11 seasons in Oakland over two stints. He's the greatest leadoff hitter and greatest base stealer in baseball history. Plus, he's from Oakland.

3. Willie Mays, Giants. Baseball's greatest player would be the Bay Area's greatest, except he played his first six seasons (and won his only title) in New York. A brilliant hitter, fielder, showman and teammate, he sadly lost his only World Series in San Francisco.

2. Joe Montana, 49ers. Unless you were in the Bay Area in the 1980s, it's hard to understand how popular the 49ers were. If the 49ers were the Beatles, Montana was a combination of Lennon and McCartney – the guy who led them to their first championship and seemingly came through in the clutch every time. Still revered.

1. Stephen Curry, Warriors. Warriors fans are seeing something they won't see again in their life – from the team (including Klay Thompson and Draymond Green and Kevon Looney) and especially from Curry. Steph's shooting changed the modern NBA and he's been the centerpiece of four NBA champions (even the Kevin Durant teams rotated around Curry). Curry has played 14 seasons in the Bay (Mays played 15, Montana played 13) and is the greatest face-of-the-franchise player in American team sports history.

Reach Brad Stanhope at bradstanhope@outlook.com.

If mosquitoes love you, it's because you're very human

One of life's mysteries is solved.

I've experienced it and you likely have too: A period when someone (maybe you, maybe another person) is attacked by bugs and others aren't. The person under attack is swatting them away while others think there isn't much of a bug problem.

For decades, Mrs. Brad and I have faced this. Bugs love her (just like dogs and cats love her, but are suspicious of me until I prove myself). They swarm her, while generally ignoring me. Mosquitoes find her irresistible. Gnats are attracted to her. (Insert your joke about me here.)

There is clearly a difference in how they swarm her and largely ignore me.

Turns out, she's not alone. Turns out, there's science behind what's happening – at least with mosquitoes. Turns out, if you're someone mosquitoes regularly attack, you probably can attribute it to your smell.

Yes.

Your smell. You smell good to a mosquito!

According to a study published last fall in the journal Cell (a scientific magazine, not to be confused with the prison newspaper I launched during my brief incarceration on Alcatraz in 1952), certain body odors are the reason mosquitos love people.

Scientific American, another magazine, described the study's conclusion thusly: "Every person has a unique scent profile made up of different chemical compounds, and the researchers found that mosquitoes were most drawn to people whose skin produces high levels of carboxylic acids. Additionally, the researchers found that peoples’ attractiveness to mosquitoes remained steady over time, regardless of changes in diet or grooming habits."

So accept it: If mosquitoes love you, they really love you and you can't do anything about it. It's like your mother (or a particularly terrible stalker).

Scientists have wondered about this for a while. One previous theory was that mosquitos were drawn to people with certain blood types, but that didn't really stand up.

In this study, scientists discovered that carboxylic acids are the determining factor. Carboxylic acids are acids produced in the oily layer that coats our skin, the amount of which varies for different people. The study couldn't determine whether there's anything that causes more carboxylic acids to be produced, but it concluded that our skin is fairly consistent in its levels of the acid over time.

That's what mosquitoes like and there may be a solid reason.

Researchers suggest that mosquitoes possibly love carboxylic acid because it's far more prominent on humans than other animals. Where you find humans, you find water. Mosquitoes, as anyone who lives near the Suisun Slough knows, love water. So they love humans and they love carboxylic acid.

So if you're a mosquito-attracting person, is there anything you can do? Probably not, although there is hope that this information might lead to some bright researcher finding a way to disguise or mitigate the carboxylic acid on your skin. Another possibility is that we force mosquitoes to consume large volumes of cocaine, which might damage their ability to smell. Or that we find tiny clothespins to put on mosquitoes' noses to make it harder for them to smell.

Ultimately, I guess, those who are attractive to mosquitoes can take solace in this: They're attractive to the bugs because they're extremely human.

Personally, I'll accept being less human-smelling if it avoids the mosquitoes.

Reach Brad Stanhope at bradstanhope@outlook.com.