Corrections

Every substantive correction issued, in full, with the date and what changed.

How corrections work

A substantive correction is anything that changes a conclusion, a figure, an attribution or a date. When one is made, the brief is amended in place, its version number is incremented, a dated note is added at the foot of the brief recording what changed and why, and the correction is listed on this page.

Typographical and formatting fixes are made without a version increment and are not listed here.

Nothing is amended silently. A brief that has been corrected says so.

Log

Corrections are listed newest first. This page was created on 20 September 2026.

26 September 2026 — The Clocks Do Not Agree, Version 1.0 to 1.1

• A passage attributed to Lindvall et al. joined words from Physics World’s coverage to words from the paper. The two are now quoted separately and each is attributed to its source; the paper’s sentence is quoted in full.
• The roadmap’s assessment was quoted with its sentence cut short without an ellipsis. It is now quoted in full.
• Two sentences omitted from the BIPM standard-frequency passage are now marked with an ellipsis.
• The passage appears in eleven of the per-species documents, not ten; the rubidium-87 microwave standard is added.
• The BACON re-measurement was first posted in December 2025 and revised in July 2026; the brief had dated it July 2026 only.
• The European fiber-network campaign is now described as published in 2026 from measurements taken in early 2023.
• The Nature research highlight appeared three days after the campaign paper, not two.
• The Optica citation for Lindvall et al. now gives volume 12, issue 6, page 843 (2025).

26 September 2026 — Three Votes on Time, Version 1.0 to 1.1

• The Draft Resolution B passage was quoted in words translated from the official French text, not in the published English. It now quotes the English: “could realistically be fulfilled by 2030 through international coordinated efforts supported by the CCTF.”
• The Version 4 entry of the draft resolutions’ version history was shown as a quotation but paraphrased. It is now quoted word for word.
• The summary of Draft Resolution B’s “considering” list now follows the text: “a consensus has not been reached”, and the inconsistencies are in measurements “involving” optical frequency standards.
• The tolerance table gave the one-hour option’s continuity as “several centuries”. The CCTF report’s option analysis says “about a millennium”; a note now records both figures.

Both corrections followed an independent check of every quotation in both briefs against its source document. Every other quotation matched its source.

Reporting an error

Corrections are the most useful thing a reader can send. Write to editor@sothic.org, ideally identifying the brief, the specific claim, and the primary document that shows the error.

Disagreements about interpretation are welcome too, and will be considered on the merits — but only factual errors produce a correction. Where a brief has drawn an inference from a document, and a reader reads that document differently, the response will normally be to state both readings rather than to replace one with the other.