Slashdot Mirror
Antarctic Telescope?
angkor pastes "'A novel Antarctic telescope with 16-m diameter mirrors would far outperform the Hubble Space Telescope, and could be built at a tiny fraction of its cost, says a scientist from the Anglo-Australian Observatory in Sydney, Australia.'"
"A telescope there would perform as well as a much larger one anywhere else on Earth. It's nearly as good as being in space", said Dr. Will Saunders of the Anglo-Australian Observatory.
:)
Nearly as good, nearly. I am still a huge fan of Hubble... so forgive me.
As someone who survives on research money for a living, I am sad to see what direction funding is going. Previously, those who had tbe best ideas would get the money.
Now, he who gets the press, gets the money.
This whole article is basically a press release by this guy. I'll summarize the article for you...
"Give me money because I _think_ I can build some cool stuff."
Those of us who got it probably let out a chuckle. Those that got it and read the replies to it let out a sad chuckle.
Not only are you limited to the southern sky, but you can't use it for months at a time (during the S. hemisphere summer). Compare that to Hubble which gets a look at the entire sky as it orbits the earth, and can operate 24/7.
Isn't "no light" what you want for looking through a telescope?
A fine is a tax you pay for doing wrong and a tax is a fine you pay for doing all right.
They can point the telescope at polar bears once in a while, if that would be OK.
I'm surprised that you care so much about Antarctica. I'm all for responsibly maintaining the Earth, but I can't find a good reason to object to building one measley telescope. Especially if it will have such a great impact on astronomy.
Do you object solely on the principle that it was decreed to be a nature preserve, or is there a deeper conviction? Do you believe that a telescope would have a negative effect on the Antarctic environment?
You are missing something. The Antarctic treaty encourages scientific research activities in Antarctica. There is not a single word in that treaty that even momentarily suggests that it would be an awful thing if the research was not expressly about Antarctica itself.
The later Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty, established in 1991, goes into more detail about Antarctica's status as a nature preserve, "dedicated to peace and science." It specifically bans mining and similar activities, and makes clear that all activities in Antarctica must be compatible with scientific research and environmental research in particular.
But it definitely does not ban non-scientific activities, like tourism, as long as their environmental impact is addresses correctly. And it certainly doesn't ban astronomy (an awful, polluting activity, astronomy! Shudder!).
Check out the Apostrophe open-source CMS: http://www.apostrophenow.com/