Re: What is so sacred about 9,192,631,770?
I understand that there is no fixed method that can ever be used, there's too many variables involved.
The current thinking seems to be that it is ok to transiently kludge the interpretation of the standard in ways that are at the discretion of the organisation deriving the standard. My question is that surely the better method would be to tweak the ultimate standard itself, then there is no ambiguity in derivation, and no discrepancies between organisations using different forks of the primary standard.
There are precedents that can be called upon to back up my suggestion. For example, the definition of the metre has been tweaked a few times over recent years.