I'm not exactly sure about converting seconds to days (leap seconds?)
I know that 1 day is 86 400 seconds.

From what I've read, the number of leap seconds is not as cyclic and essentially fixes variations is earths speed around the sun. The latest cycle for a leaps seconds has be quite a while. If I understood what I was reading correctly, it appears that we may have to start subtracting seconds from days too. That all being said, I think you are safe using the stardard of 60^2 * 24 for a day, as long as you're only using your dates as a comparison and are not in need of specific precision on locating planets during a certain time frame.

@Adam: Time today is based on 1 statistic cyclus. Since there is more than 1 cycle and not equal in turn, it could take some time before anyone can really share you the correct answer.
The division of a second is done with atoms, as I understood it. Meaning that they made an agreement, on how much turns an atom has in 1 second. This of course is a very simplistic and amateurisch explanation.

@Adam: Since the exact time of 'a today' could not be exactly said in seconds and is weekly too much trouble is to adjust for all, we have the leapyear. Since the leapyear is also incorrect, we know the leapseconds, to keep the things that weren't right on timetrack.

@Adam: Most of the time, us humans have more than enough with; wayback, yesterday, today, tomorrow and wayforward.

@Adam: In the Holy Scripture there is a story, were GOD turns the our planet back in a former position 'earlier' in time, so maybe we get some Holy Leaphours too.

it is an old dialog of two drug-eaters:
- what time now?
- friday...
- yeah... autumn will soon...

@shoorick: Beavis and Butthead?

@Adam: "I rather have a tomato-fight over this than an atom-war, since both ways don't make right switch."

@Niels, atomic clocks are only accurate within your frame of reference. Orbiting atomic clocks appear to move slower than ones on Earth, since they are moving at greater magnitudes of speed in comparison to the ones stationary on Earth.

@smiddy: I didn't said that atomic-clocks were accurate and I know they are not absolute accurate.

Niels, I was implying that they are relatively accurate given thier own frame, but from an observers frame moving at differing speeds at orders of magnitude different they are not.

@YONG, To be honest with you, my faith differs from my logical opinion, which is, prayers are useless and GOD is not souverain nor almighty or is just not good, this also implies that there is no such GOD as the Holy Scripture describes. Of course when things don't change within my life, I take the logical opinion before I die.

ps.
The logical opinion is not based on the visible world.

@smiddy, I see you describe my earlier post with your latest.

@YONG, Maybe GOD's name is Ab, and is that name related to the use of power.

@Niels: As I mentioned earlier, I respect your point of view. PERIOD.

YONG

@Adam, I came across this one:

http://www.time.gov/exhibits.html

@YONG, Ok. I just hate GOD's that can tumble a mount, only when it's not needed.

@YONG, I just wanted to share this; It seems to me that the original system has been taken over by emulators, scripts, etc. LO