Future of Astronomy

[Hans Tucker (Hans)]

A few years ago the UK drastically cut funding to Astronomy projects and facilities, although they did find money to host the Olympics. Now after fund cuts to NASA I just read that the US astronomy budget is facing unprecedented cuts with potential closures of several facilities

such as the Very Long Baseline Array (VLBA) and the Green Bank Radio Telescope, as well as shutting down four different telescopes at the Kitt Peak Observatory by 2017.

It is sad when two countries that have been in the fore front of Astronomy and now shutting down facilities and projects. I really hope the ESO do not follow.

[Miaplacidus (Brian)]

The answer to that one, Hans, is easy. Look around you. The future of astronomy is AMATEUR.

Just think how things were 20 years ago. The images and scientific discoveries (e.g. BOSS) achieved in people's back yards and displayed hereabouts on a daily basis would have been unthinkable back then. Another 20 years of technological advances and enthusiastic amateurs and entrepreneurs, and whatever the NASA boys are up to will be well and truly eclipsed.

[leon]

Yes Brian I do have to agree with you, the images and research of the general Astronomy community world wide is just astounding, and is forging forward at an incredible rate.

I cant imaging what the next ten years holds.

Leon

[TrevorW]

Shame when they still have billions to spend on weapons and weapon development

[Peter Ward]

Originally Posted by Miaplacidus

The answer to that one, Hans, is easy. Look around you. The future of astronomy is AMATEUR.

Just think how things were 20 years ago. The images and scientific discoveries (e.g. BOSS) achieved in people's back yards and displayed hereabouts on a daily basis would have been unthinkable back then. Another 20 years of technological advances and enthusiastic amateurs and entrepreneurs, and whatever the NASA boys are up to will be well and truly eclipsed.

Sorry, if my response seems rude, but amateurs rarely have Ph.d's and budgets to run 10+meter class optical telescopes, square kilometer arrays and cover the spectrum from radio to gamma rays, put sublime optics into orbit etc. etc.

Sure amateurs do fluff & stuff at the edges, but you'd be deluded if you think tiny telescopes in backyards will do much for the cutting edge of research.

....sometimes you really do need a bigger hammer.

[Miaplacidus (Brian)]

Not rude at all, Peter. Respect your opinion, of course, as well as your right to express it.

Still, I'm not so sure. I wouldn't even rule out amateur collectives managing some sort of robotic interplanetary exploration in the future. I try never to underestimate the creativity and ingenuity of the succeeding generations (double entendre intended).

PS. Please don't take any of this to mean that I approve of the governmental cuts to the major space agencies. Rather, the writing is on the wall there for anyone with eyes to see, and I can't see why the downsizing of the public sector bodies isn't going to continue. Something will fill the vacuum, and that "something" will naturally have to be the private sector and dedicated volunteers.

Plus, of course, new agencies formed in the newly affluent countries. (Lets face it, it's only because the UK and the US are now insolvent that they've had to cut back the way they have.)

[rally]

Brian,

Do you think its a straight forward issue of slashing budgets or maybe a change in the way those budgets are directed ?

Each year we see new satellites being launched that are producing results that were barely even dreamt of prior to the results being available.
We all know of Hubble and the Stereo satellites

It is a fairly obvious fact of life that we all have to live with, that terrestrial observing is severely limited when compared to satellite imagery, due to the earths rotation, relative positioning of observatories on our blue sphere, the atmosphere and the many sources of noise and aberrations.

Its not just that they are so much better because they can operate in near perfect conditions, get all the spectra that we cant even get to detect, look at objects with subexposure times of literally weeks if they need to compared to a few hours on earth.

If you can afford to put up a satellite that can get such good data, why keep spending money sustaining "old technology" on earth ?

I realise there will always be a place for observatories, and the competitive demands for observation time will ensure that existing observatories probably are still a cheap option.
I guess if they can ever stick some radio arrays on the moon that will be the end of radio telescopes on earth ?

But I do wonder if the total budget for astronomy hasn't actually increased overall - just that now NASA is getting a big slice of it in the launches and capital costs rather than all the government owned and university owned observatories.
Anyone seen any numbers floating around ?

The billions spent just on Hubble and the Webb Telescopes not to mention all the others must represent a huge chunk of astronomical budget.

I think there also must be a lot of professional astronomy that has shifted away from observation time to data mining time.
There is now more data available from these systems than can probably ever be fully investigated and its about to get bigger.

Something to think about

Rally

[Miaplacidus (Brian)]

Maybe Rally. Not sure I follow...


But anyway, just by way of being a f'rinstance. Here is a potted history of one very successful amateur from years ago:-



Grote Reber was the father of radio astronomy, being the first person to build a "big dish" antenna for the purpose of mapping the sky at radio frequencies. He discovered many discrete radio sources, and he mapped the band of bright radio emission from our Galaxy, the Milky Way.


Reber came to Tasmania in the late 1950s because of its unique location at high magnetic latitude in the southern hemisphere. He spent 40 years studying low frequency emissions with telescopes he built himself, first in partnership with the University of Tasmania School of Physics, and later on his own at Bothwell. His accomplishments are remarkable, not only in radio astronomy but also in electrical powered transport, in carbon dating of aboriginal settlements, and in the patterns made by growing bean plants. His creative vision had no limits...


I've seen photos of his array. Easily measured in acres.



http://www.groterebermuseum.org.au/index.html

[Merlin66 (Ken)]

I, like others, am very sad to see the demise of all the older land based observatories and the equipment and infrastructure they supported.
Regards amateurs...well I'd love to agree 200% that there will be a resurgence of amateur capablities ( reminiscences of the Victorian Gentlemen astronomers) but.......
From what I've seen in the past few years, schools, colleges and universities have lost the capablity to train students. And many of the current X-Y-Z generation unfortunately don't have the rigor and dedication needed to apply themselves to serious amateur astronomy.
Sure, there will always be a small minority of amateurs who will do the extra mile....but there's not that many even on a global scale.
I struggle to get amateurs interested and develop a capability in spectroscopy.
This branch of astronomy has contributed more than 80% of all the knowledge we have of the universe, yet we ignore it!
I've been chastised by professional spectroscopists for even trying to consider amateur contributions to the "science" - I should not be encouraging them to start in an area where the "minimum" level of education would/should be a first or second degree in mathematics/ physics.
I disagree.
Onwards and Upwards.

[Peter Ward]

Originally Posted by Miaplacidus

Grote Reber was the father of radio astronomy, being the first person to build a "big dish" antenna for the purpose of mapping the sky at radio frequencies.......

I'd put Jansky up at the "father of radio astronomy". Reber...an interesting character for sure... built on Jansky's work.... it would be long bow to suggest Reber was the first to conduct radio-frequency observations.

[ZeroID (Brent)]

It scares me because it's another 'dumbing' down of Science. Humankind only got to where it is now through curiosity ( 'Curiousity .. !! ' well named ) and the loss of opportunities, encouragement, funding, technology is slowing killing the nurturing of younger people into these fields of exploration. If we stop exploring we're at a dead end as a species, we may as well be worms.

[PeterM]

Originally Posted by Peter Ward

Sorry, if my response seems rude, but amateurs rarely have Ph.d's and budgets to run 10+meter class optical telescopes, square kilometer arrays and cover the spectrum from radio to gamma rays, put sublime optics into orbit etc. etc.

Sure amateurs do fluff & stuff at the edges, but you'd be deluded if you think tiny telescopes in backyards will do much for the cutting edge of research.

....sometimes you really do need a bigger hammer.

I am responding to these bollocks comments after several concerned amateur astronomers advised me of the post. I am responding to this in defence of what amateurs have achieved in the past, do now and will in the future in contributing to the science of astronomy.

Rude? I have several other words that could replace this with but I do not want to be banned as I like reporting BOSS discoveries here Pete old mate and I have seen the value that professionals attribute to work that plain old everyday dedicated amateurs are doing, amateurs like myself and many others. The kind that frequent IIS regularly and the kind that will have dreams about doing this in the future.

To be honest I was pretty peeved off with your "fluff n stuff" comment.

Ok every now and then you produce a pretty pic and I congratulate you on it as I often do the many, many others who are doing brilliant work often without hammers like you have. You know Pete there is so much more you could do if you wanted to contribute to the science of astronomy especially with your hammer.

So are you saying you don't get much if any feedback from pros on the odd good image you post, is that correct?

"Fluff n stuff" is derogatory to me and amateur astronomers and I take offence but clearly its just a lack of knowledge on your part so let me assist you here.

BOSS get LOTS of ongoing support and feedback from many professional astronomers at least weekly, believe me your jaw would drop. They have clearly stated that amateur astronomers are an important assett to them so please never call it "fluff n stuff".

Our discoveries have been keenly followed up by amongst others - The Hale 200inch, Hubble, Swift, Gemini N&S, the 2x 6.5 m Magellan scopes, The Dupont scope, the 10m SALT scope, these are pretty big hammers Pete.
Infact other important work has been dropped to get spectra of some of these events

I say again amateurs can if they wish, with pretty basic equipment contribute to the science of astronomy.

So Pete old mate I do not think it delusional when 4 amateur astronomers are included as authors (and we were not aware of this prior) in a scientific paper to be published in The Astrophysical Journal for the very early discovery of SN2011iv which is now being used to rewrite the current theories of supernova physics. This is one of several papers being written about discoveries we made! So how's that!

Amateur astronomers who read this please understand I am writing this in defence of fluff n stuff remarks that are clearly wrong, misinformed and nonsense. You can contribute in a meaningful way if you wish, maybe not now but perhaps you will in the future and professional astronomers will welcome you with open arms.

Fluff n stuff? absolute bollocks with a capital B.

So Pete hows about removing fluff n stuff from your post.

Am looking forward to another pretty pic Pete?

[Stardrifter_WA]

Originally Posted by PeterM

Fluff n stuff? absolute bollocks with a capital B.

Am looking forward to another pretty pic Pete?

Hi Peter M,

Well said!

I am with you on this as I have I worked, voluntarily, at Perth Observatory for quite a few years, up until my MVA in 1999 and have also contributed to a number of scientific papers. Sure, I had use of pro equipment, but that doesn't diminish my contribution, as an amateur. Without my contribution Perth Observatory staff would not have been able to allocate the time necessary, due to staffing pressures.

Peter W's comment of fluff and stuff is demeaning to those amateurs who have made a contribution to the body of science, however small. Although, having said that, I can understand where Peter W is coming from, particularly in regard to the large resource required to run major observatories. Amateurs simply do not have these resources.

As an amateur, I am once again getting involved with a major project at Perth Observatory, after a hiatus of 13 years; 13 long years of recovery from a serious accident. I have just had an operation on Monday last, the first of two stage reconstruction, and once I have recovered from this (I only have the use of one hand at present) I will commence on a new project that, without my assistance, probably wouldn't get done for the same aforementioned staffing pressures.

Amateurs do have a major part to play. There is more pro-am collaboration now than ever before.

[AstroJunk (Jonathan)]

This is a great thread. I've just come back in from refining the orbit of an NEO for the Minor Planet Centre.

Lets see just how fluffy it is when it lands on Wardies head

(actually, there are a team of amateurs who have shown that various asteroids are indeed 'fluffy' and are constrained in their rotational periods due to effects of gravity - bloody good work guys and all done with backyard scopes that would have otherwise been used taking the bazillionth and oneth photo of Orion!)

[Gem (Grant)]

Society has no long term vision. Everything is short term individual gain. Science is a long term investment.

I also feel sorry for other scientific fields. I always wondered what happened to those poor CSIRO biologists who had all their crop trashed by the enviro-protesters. I would have been interested in their scientific findings rather than trash them before they had a chance to examine the evidence...

[CometGuy]

Well said Peterm Not all "cutting edge discoveries" need big hammers!

Terry

[brian nordstrom (As avatar)]

I agree with you there as well Peter , a good friend of mine from auckland , Jenny McCormick , 'farm cove observory' was a member of a world wide search for extra solar planets in the late 90's and guess what ? they found about the 10th extra solar planet discovered !!!
Jenny used a Meade 10 inch lx200 and on memory the biggest scope they used was a C14 , fluff and stuff !@!! .
World breaking news that was , you go girl ..
Brian.

[jjjnettie (Jeanette)]

Originally Posted by CometGuy

Well said Peterm Not all "cutting edge discoveries" need big hammers!

Terry

When NASA turns 5 of their space craft towards a comet you've discovered in your back yard, that's pretty damn serious stuff.
And when that ball of ice came back around the other side of the Sun, EVERY professional and amateur astronomer across the globe was cheering. How awesome was that.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ymxgchf8x0w

[Zhou (Mick)]

It is a real shame that budgets world wide are apparently being cut for astronomy research. As someone who aspires to become a professional astronomer it does give one food for thought.

There does seem to be little motivation for people to do the rigorous scientific and mathematical training to become a professional astronomer/ astrophysicist. It is surely more profitable to train as a geologist and work for the big mining companies!

When the Soviet's launched Sputnik in 1957 it roused the American government to encourage people to study the sciences and mathematics. However, nowadays, as the pioneering spirit of discovery has waned fewer people are willing to dedicate a sizable chunk of their life (and income) doing the training that leads to a career in scientific research; it is percived as being uncool and unprofitable. What can we do about it?

"Educate and inspire"

I notice in some of the previous posts on this thread some antaganism. Astronomy benifits from both professional and amateur astronomers doing their respesctive jobs. They both have their strengths and weaknesses. Professionals have greater access to cutting edge technology but they are constrained by funding and the very narrow specialisation that is inherent in modern science. Amateur astronomers generally have less access to the "big toys" that the professionals use but have the advantage of freedom in deciding what they research, how they do it and most importantly the imagination on how they can achieve their outcomes.

It would be great to hear some comments from professional astronomers who are members of IIS.

Chill

[AstroJunk (Jonathan)]

Originally Posted by jjjnettie

And when that ball of ice came back around the other side of the Sun, EVERY professional and amateur astronomer across the globe was cheering.

Although it did look a bit fluffy