A more personal account on Arecibo (warts and all, to some extent), how you can help ensure its continued funding and why you should do so.
TLDR version of this longer post :
Arecibo is very far from being outdated, nor is it likely to be surpassed in the next decade or two. Arecibo is an extremely mature facility - rather than being obsolete, it's more capable now than it ever was before. It's had many upgrades since its construction in 1963; new discoveries are still resulting from the last one in 2004, and more upgrades could improve it still further. There is no other facility planned that could fully supersede Arecibo save perhaps the Square Kilometre Array, which is unlikely to be operational for the next 15 years (and if you're American and worry about these things, the US isn't playing much of a role in that). Even that will not necessarily reproduce, let alone exceed, all of Arecibo's capabilities. Arecibo requires a relatively modest amount of funding for a unique and diverse range of scientific outputs : from asteroids to aliens, to pulsars and planets, galaxies and... err... Goldenye....
The NSF are preparing to asses the long-term funding model of Arecibo; options range from sustaining the existing funding model right down to site closure. Although the decision isn't expected until sometime next year, the official public consultation period extends on June 23rd this year. So get your comments to them ASAP. A suggested generic "I love Arecibo !" message is included. Additionally or alternatively you can sign a poll (deadline June 26th) if you just want to make your support known but don't wish to commit to a specific funding plan.
While few people really expect Arecibo to close, this isn't an option that should be dismissed entirely. It's all too easy for funding agencies to conclude that Arecibo is a technological dinosaur that can't compete with new telescopes like the Chinese FAST or the SKA pathfinder telescopes. It's actually none of these things - it's capable of science which is simply impossible anywhere else. There's really no reason to think that its greatest days don't lie ahead of it.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
-
Of course you can prove a negative. In one sense this can be the easiest thing in the world : your theory predicts something which doesn...
-
Why Philosophy Matters for Science : A Worked Example "Fox News host Chris Wallace pushed Republican presidential candidate to expand...
-
In the last batch of simulations, we dropped a long gas stream into the gravitational potential of a cluster to see if it would get torn...
Shared, because this matters!
ReplyDeleteOne of my brothers told me, some time ago, about his botanical research in the jungles of Belize. There's a common frog there that makes a noise like "mik" all night. One of the other researchers, called Mick, nearly cracked up through sleep deprivation.
Thanks !
ReplyDeleteI eventually got used to the coquis... mostly. Every so often for no particular reason I'd become conscious of them again. And I didn't even mention the chickens. Puerto Rican roosters crow entirely at random throughout the day, and they're everywhere. 5am in the narrow gap between my house and my neighbours... yes, that's a perfect time and location to screech yer little head off...
Every ongoing project of this sort requires ongoing assessment. That's okay. When dealing with gummint bureaucracy, Here's my marketing angle: only I'm not writing to NSF. I'm going to my Congress Critters.
ReplyDeleteArecibo is in the right place, 18.3464° N . Means it can see more sky than FAST at 25.6525° N.
Arecibo sees gas formations. Not even VLA sees gas as well. That's where the science is and no other scope is comparable. And there's lots to do in that range of astronomy.
Arecibo can actively image near earth asteroids. On the remote chance of an asteroid strike, that might just be important. ( the fear sell, these are politicians )
Arecibo needs our support, politically. But it's in Puerto Rico. Therefore, It doesn't have powerful senators and representatives backing it, as do CONUS observatories.
Summary: Arecibo still does better science than comparable dishes but Its funding model is horrid. Allowing Arecibo to revert to jungle would be an embarrassment to the USA, which NSF leadership seem intent upon allowing.
Solution: Fix NSF, which has turned a high profile, high-prestige American astronomical observatory into a dog's dinner. Unify command: get Cornell University back at the wheel at Arecibo. NSF doesn't want Arecibo, give it to a NASA / JPL - administered consortium.
http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2016/nsf16005/nsf16005.jsp
Rhys Taylor The roosters in Llangynin have a similar sense of timing, ie none at all. The farm they are on also has peacocks. Fortunately, I rather like the noise they make...
ReplyDeleteDan Weese
ReplyDeleteEvery ongoing project of this sort requires ongoing assessment. That's okay.
I completely agree. The problem in this case is that the amount of assessment is insane. There seemed to be a major report required almost every week.
One thing I didn't mention was the current organisational structure, which is complex. Funding is provided mostly by the NSF and NASA. Overall jurisdiction resides with the NSF, but the administration is handled through three separate organisations (SRI, USRA, and the local UMET college) who each manage different aspects of the Observatory. So it is in effect being run on some level by five different institutions (got a feeling I'm missing a couple) while the Observatory itself does not exist as a legal entity. Hence the amount of paperwork required that doesn't actually contribute a damn thing to getting science done is crazy. "Here's yet another report about all the great science I could be doing if I didn't have to write this report about all the great science I could be doing".
Personally I'd take any funding model which allows scientists to do science, provides support and time for external users, and is stable.
Solution: Fix NSF, which has turned a high profile, high-prestige American astronomical observatory into a dog's dinner.
Fixing NSF would certainly be nice, but is easier said than done.
Unify command: get Cornell University back at the wheel at Arecibo.
Or NRAO, who already know quite a lot about running radio telescopes. Not sure what the staff would make about having Cornell back in charge, but I bet at least some of them would get pretty upset. Mind you, both NRAO and Cornell just administer funding which comes from the NSF, though having a single organisation doing the admin would simplify things a lot.
The Observatory needs to legally exist as its own institution. That would allow it to seek its own funding and organise itself, rather than being subject to the whims and rules of multiple different institutions. For example there is/was a restriction on NASA personnel from talking to the Chinese, but not everyone on site works for NASA.
A more amusing tale concerns the USRA regulations. If taken to extremes, USRA employees would not be able to drink alcohol on site. But the site director is employed by SRI, who have no such rule. The USRA rules also forbade us from talking about the USRA rules with non-USRA employees. So technically it was possible that the director could offer us a drink and we would have to say no without being able to explain why.
Chris Blackmore There were in fact peacocks not far from the observatory, though I never heard them. Much nicer sound than the roosters, which just made a sort of unpleasant "HELP I AM BEING STRANGLED !" sound than the traditional cock-a-doodle-do.
ReplyDeleteI preferred the iguanas, much quieter.
Rhys Taylor Very good. RE: when I'm confronted with bureaucratic reporting, as a consultant / contractor, the teams I've been on hire a small staff of tech writers to generate that reporting on an ongoing basis. That's all they do.
ReplyDeleteI'll amend my contacts with Congress to say NRAO might be a more suitable command entity. I'd heard Cornell had done a fairly good job whilst they were in charge but your suggestion sounds more appropriate anyway. I've done some work which interfaces with Cornell's ornithology datasets.
There are two sides to institutional independence: once you've detached the entity, then the bureaucratic meddling is replaced with an equal volume of grant writing and the concomitant wheedling.
At any rate, we seem to agree Arecibo's current problems stem from a lack of unified command. SRI is little more than a bloated tick upon Uncle Sam's scrotum. The very idea, that an astronomer can't have a wee dram of Puerto Rico's finest export after a hard day's work is preposterous.
Dan Weese
ReplyDeleteRE: when I'm confronted with bureaucratic reporting, as a consultant / contractor, the teams I've been on hire a small staff of tech writers to generate that reporting on an ongoing basis. That's all they do.
That would be a fantastic solution. Alas the financial situation is such that I doubt the penny-pinching would allow this. It's at the point where the money is too tight to spend money that would overall save money.
At any rate, we seem to agree Arecibo's current problems stem from a lack of unified command.
Oh, most definitely, though I'd be hard-pressed to say whether it would be better to transfer to an existing entity, create a new one, or try and salvage the unholy triumvirate that currently administers the place. When I was there the relation between the USRA and SRI directors was icy, and the less said about the UMET director the better. All three of them have (been) moved on to pastures new (in the UMET case replaced with someone about ten orders of magnitude better as a human being, though I left soon afterwards), so I can't say what it's like currently. Consultation with the staff is needed. In any case, it made the already inherently complicated situation of three administrations much worse than it needed to be.
SRI is little more than a bloated tick upon Uncle Sam's scrotum. The very idea, that an astronomer can't have a wee dram of Puerto Rico's finest export after a hard day's work is preposterous.
Actually that was USRA. SRI didn't have any rules against this, or at least certain famous SRI employees took no notice of such rules (and last I heard SRI employees were actually quite happy). In fairness this wasn't ever actually enforced by USRA, although certain USRA managers did take the idea of timesheets seriously for no reason that anyone could ever understand. But it must be said that I'm not hearing any complaints (even in private) about the current USRA administration, and that's from people who most certainly would complain if anything was amiss. Actually I'm getting lots of emails from them about the current situation; they seem to be making an earnest and determined effort to actually solve this.
In short, while the current situation isn't ideal, the individuals in charge matter at least as much as which organisations are running things. Alternative setups are well worth suggesting, but given the chronically chaotic situation there I'd say "listen to the staff" above all else. The important thing right now is to demonstrate the need for someone to fund the place.
Rhys Taylor Well, I ought to have put that bit about wee drams and SRI in separate paragraphs, heh heh. SRI is just DARPA Lite, and in many cases cannot be distinguished from DARPA.
ReplyDeleteMany years ago, I was in a brigade command facility of a US Army infantry division. Things were not going well. A two-star general waded into the middle of the tent and bellowed "GENTLEMEN. THIS IS CRISIS MANAGEMENT" which is the most appalling assessment of anyone's leadership I've ever heard. He then proceeded to issue some clear orders, took him about two hours to get the pointy end forward and the greasy side down. Never forgot that.
Crisis management. Being reduced to coping with every bit of fresh evil as it comes over the horizon.
My own strategy as a consultant has been to identify two people:
The first requires some detective work but it's not hard. I trek through the cubicle farms, looking for the person who handles all the exceptions. Don't know why but it's usually a woman. Phone ringing off the hook, people lined up at her cubicle entrance, piles of documents here and there. They don't dare promote this woman lest the entire operation collapse into flaming shit and ruin.
The second person is her manager, the person who approves all those exceptions.
I write my systems around those two people. Been at this game for three decades and more, it's never failed me. Learned it from an old McKinsey consultant.
When I write a letter to Congress, I photocopy my voter's ID card onto a the upper left corner of the paper. It's always written by hand. It will be pretty much what I wrote here, but it will say to put NRAO in charge because current leadership is ineffective. Political rationale: Arecibo is a prestige science facility for the USA. Economic rationale: too many cooks not only spoil the broth but the current cooks are wasting ingredients and not listening to the customers.