Slashdot Mirror


South Africa Wins Science Panel's Backing To Host SKA Telescope

ananyo writes "A scientific panel has narrowly recommended South Africa over Australia as the best site for the proposed Square Kilometre Array (SKA), an enormous US$2.1-billion radio telescope. While the project's member states have yet to make a final decision on where the telescope will go, the odds are now that the African bid will ultimately win out against the joint bid from Australia and New Zealand to host the project. The SKA radio telescope will be made up of some a 3,000 dishes, each 15 metres in diameter. The project will try to answer big questions about the early Universe: how the first elements heavier than helium formed, for example, and how the first galaxies coalesced. The telescope is so sensitive that it could even pick up television signals from distant worlds — something that might aid in the search for extraterrestrial intelligence."

29 of 117 comments (clear)

  1. As an Australian, all I can say is - by Zaldarr · · Score: 3, Insightful

    that it's not over yet.

    --
    I write professional videogame reviews! http://www.digitallydownloaded.net/
    1. Re:As an Australian, all I can say is - by bruce_the_loon · · Score: 4, Funny

      As a South African, I'll reply with -

      "Bring it on Warnie-boy"

      --
      Trying to become famous by taking photos. Visit my homepage please.
    2. Re:As an Australian, all I can say is - by Zaldarr · · Score: 2

      Dem's fightin' words Wikus!

      --
      I write professional videogame reviews! http://www.digitallydownloaded.net/
    3. Re:As an Australian, all I can say is - by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      I can see it now. 3 minutes (roughly 3 deliveries) before the decision is due, the last two standing saffers on the committee will attempt an ill-judged debate-point, allowing Mark Waugh to underarm the proposal to Gilly at the other end for an easy counter-point and victory, thus beginning the decades-long tradition of South African choking at international business deals.

      Why oh why did you send Alan Donald and Lance Kluesener as your delegates?? :D

  2. Re:Project security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The bleeding hearts of Europe want to patronise the Africans once again with a perceived leg up rather than guarantee the long term stability and viability of the project. Why isn't the LHC based in South Africa?

  3. I disagree, but I'm not sure how to explain by FairAndHateful · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I will admit that I don't know the cultures of both places very well, but between the two...

    Wouldn't you go with Australia based on population density alone? This is a radio telescope, something you want in someplace remote. You pick a square kilometer out in the middle of the outback, there's going to be like NO local interference. South Africa has approximately 40 times the population density, and they seem to be spread around the country a little more evenly than Australia.

    1. Re:I disagree, but I'm not sure how to explain by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 2

      This is a radio telescope, something you want in someplace remote. You pick a square kilometer out in the middle of the outback, there's going to be like NO local interference. South Africa has approximately 40 times the population density, and they seem to be spread around the country a little more evenly than Australia

      This is exactly what intriques me

      I do not know what criteria that so-called "Science Panel" use - but for a radio telescope, the more remote the place, the less man-made radio signal there is, the better the location is

      That is why I suspect PC --- as is Political Correctness --- forms a ***BIG*** part of the criteria

      For Sa is mostly Blacks and Au is mostly Whites

      Race does matter after all - in this 21st century science project

      --
      Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
    2. Re:I disagree, but I'm not sure how to explain by bruce_the_loon · · Score: 5, Informative

      In most areas of South Africa, I would agree with you, but the Carnarvon site is so remote and inhospitable that it is regarded as one of the most radio-quiet places in the world. That combined with a law passed guaranteeing radio quiet in any designated area, such as the site, was part of the attraction.

      Also, the engineers and scientists on our MeerKAT project team have come up with some very interesting technology to keep the farmers connected via cellular phones while keeping the site free from spillage. I get a sense that our chaps are "immature" who like to fiddle and innovate. And without the IP issues that plagues the West at the moment.

      --
      Trying to become famous by taking photos. Visit my homepage please.
    3. Re:I disagree, but I'm not sure how to explain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      Because white reflects more radiation than black???

    4. Re:I disagree, but I'm not sure how to explain by Hognoxious · · Score: 2

      How much have you researched this issue? Have you ever worked with telescopes? If your answers are no and no then please shut the fuck up and accept the experts' decision.

      At what level of qualifications, intelligence and experience does the immunity from influences such as political pressure, coercion and corruption kick in?

      If you think knowing the right thing implies doing the right thing you're either hopelessly naïve or you're one of the extra terrestrials they're looking for.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    5. Re:I disagree, but I'm not sure how to explain by CapOblivious2010 · · Score: 2, Informative

      South Africa is a crappy shithole in Africa run by and inhabited mainly by the niggers.

      I'm serious by the way.....it's a stupid idea.

      Then why do you undermine your argument by using words like "niggers"? It doesn't make your argument any stronger; it just makes you look like a moron. Since you're too stupid to see that, people are going to assume you're also too stupid to analyze the actual pros/cons of the situation.

  4. What Sa has over Au ? by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 2, Informative

    I don't have time to read TFA, so please tell us what SA has over Au?

    We are talking about a project that worth BILLIONS, and that the structures (radar and all) must be kept in a place

    I don't mean to be patronizing - but I just can't see how Sa can win over Au in term of safety

    Or is PC --- as in Political Correctness --- an important criteria in choosing Sa over Au?

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
    1. Re:What Sa has over Au ? by bruce_the_loon · · Score: 5, Informative
      • Cheaper construction costs due to the site being less remote.
      • Lower fiber-optic and power grid installation costs for the same reason.
      • Better government support, SA government is paying some infrastructure costs like the fiber optics and is legally guaranteeing radio-quiet.
      • Currently better back-haul undersea cables. 5 cables in two geographically redundant sets (west and east coasts) with multi-terabit capacity with 40Gbps lambda capability will be in place.
      • Innovative telescope and equipment design being done by the South Africans is lowering the per-telescope cost significantly as well.

      Think that covers it.

      --
      Trying to become famous by taking photos. Visit my homepage please.
    2. Re:What Sa has over Au ? by james.mcarthur · · Score: 5, Informative

      "I don't mean to be patronizing - but I just can't see how Sa can win over Au in term of safety"

      I think its more likely Australia's poor record at developing and capitalising on high-tech R&D.

      Australia doesn't do high-tech. Look at Government policy for the last 20 years. Look at which companies in Oz actually do R&D. The poster child for Australian R&D is the CSIRO, and really they're the poster child because there is no-one else.

      Then there is our Universities that are churning out business-types and lawyers but fewer and fewer scientists. So even if we wanted to start doing anything remotely high-tech, we don't have the people to do it - we'd need to import them. And there is a madness around these parts about letting immigrants into the country, fanned by the right-wing Opposition.

      This isn't meant to be dismissive of the Australian proposal; it was very good and by all accounts so was the SA one. The plans for the supporting infrastructure was very impressive. But Australia has a reputation of only being interested in what we can dig out of the ground, not what we can use our brains for.

    3. Re:What Sa has over Au ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Better government support, SA government is paying some infrastructure costs like the fiber optics and is legally guaranteeing radio-quiet.

      These points actually weigh in favour of the Australian bid: their National Broadband Network project ($40b of government-funded network infrastructure development) is being run out to Geraldton (closest town to the prospective SKA site). Both countries are legally guaranteeing radio-quiet zones - but, to be honest, I'd expect the legal enforcement environment in Australia to be more reliable than that in South Africa.

      You missed one other point in favour of South Africa: higher altitude, which is important at higher radio frequencies. Although at lower frequencies, altitude doesn't make any difference, and the limiting atmospheric factor is the stability of the ionosphere (which is better at the Australian site).

      Innovative telescope and equipment design being done by the South Africans is lowering the per-telescope cost significantly as well.

      There's a lot of technology development going on in both countries. The South African pathfinder telescope (MeerKAT) is using Gregorian offset antennas, produced via some new process (hydroforming, I think), but the radio receivers are relatively conventional. The Australian pathfinder telescope (ASKAP) is using relatively conventional antennas, but has some new Phased Array Feed receivers which allow it to see 30x as much of the sky at one time. I think the new Australian receivers are potentially more game-changing, but riskier: the first set had unexpectedly high noise across half of their frequency band, which they're working on fixing with the second batch.

    4. Re:What Sa has over Au ? by arisvega · · Score: 2

      .. so please tell us what SA has over Au?

      Location. Australia is too far away, unless you live on it. And most people don't.

      --
      The three laws of thermodynamics:(1) You can't win. (2) You can't break even. (3) You can't even quit.
  5. Re:Digital signal by artor3 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    As long as it's above the noise floor, it would be recognizable. Not necessarily as TV, but as some sort of intentionally created signal. I doubt we'd be able to watch it though.

    The real home run, though the odds are miniscule, would be if the timing works out that we pick up extraterrestrial signals right around the time that some other civilization is learning the basics of frequency modulated radio, so that they're just mapping frequencies of sound directly to frequencies of light. That would actually allow us to hear alien speech, which would obviously be amazing.

    Of course, that assumes that they use verbal communication, and that their technology progresses similar to ours, and that the window of time that they used this technology (a couple centuries at most if they're similar to us) just so happens to fall in the time that we're listening, instead of millions of years before or after. So I'm not holding my breath, but it sure would be cool.

  6. Re:Rumours are not facts... by bruce_the_loon · · Score: 2

    This isn't a rumour, it is a sub-recommendation feeding into the main decision. The recommendation that the physical site and associated costs are better for the South African bid is fact.

    --
    Trying to become famous by taking photos. Visit my homepage please.
  7. Re:Project security by flyingfsck · · Score: 2

    It is in the middle of the karoo, which is a desert. The biggest security threat would be dirty deeds done with sheep.

    --
    Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
  8. Good to hear this. by Shag · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The continent of Africa, as a whole, is woefully underdeveloped for astronomy (like it is for lots of other things). Yes, South Africa has some decent stuff, like SALT, based on the Hobby-Eberley scope in Texas, which is quite large. And the Canaries have plenty of observatories near Africa, but they're under Spanish control. A SKA would probably include some outlying dishes one or even two countries removed from South Africa, which would help make science more visible in those countries as well. /Biased since I work in astronomy and am married to an African. ;)

    --
    Village idiot in some extremely smart villages.
  9. Re:Project security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    Just going down the list of countries associated with South Africa's bid:

    • Namibia: stable since its war of independence (from South Africa) in 1990.
    • Botswana: stable since independence in 1966.
    • Mozambique: civil war ended in 1992.
    • Ghana: after a coup, democracy restored in 1992.
    • Kenya: not very democratic in the 80s and 90s, but hasn't had a serious coup attempt since 1992.
    • Madagascar: revolution in 2009, but prior to that was stable from 1992.
    • Zambia: most recent revolution in 1991.
    • South Africa: apartheid overthrown in 1994

    Compared with:

    • Australia: stable since (peaceful) independence in 1901.
    • New Zealand: self-governing in 1856; stable since then.

    The SKA is intended to operate for 50 years. The fact that only one African SKA country has had a revolution in the last 18 years is promising - but still, I'd expect a couple more (if not South Africa itself) to be unstable during that time. Conversely, it would be surprising if Australia or New Zealand experienced political instability on that level.

  10. Re:TV and Intelligence? by nomagnettowomen · · Score: 2

    I am very much hoping that highly intelligent beings have received our signals, understood our culture, and are beaming back final episodes for series that were cancelled in mid-season. There are many series that need better endings. But which ones depends on how far away they are. If they are closer, they could be now sending a better ending for Joanie Loves Chachi. If they are farther away, they could produce a better ending for The Man From U.N.C.L.E. I just hope they do not become big fans of that famous TV show, The Invaders.

  11. Re:TV and Intelligence? by G3ckoG33k · · Score: 2

    'God forbid they've received our terrestrial signals!'

    I wonder what they would fear most, tv evangelicals or our science fiction?

  12. Radio Spectrum Pollution . . . ? by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 2, Funny

    Just as light pollution is a problem for astronomers, Radio Spectrum Pollution is a problem for radio astronomers. Won't this be a big problem in South Africa?

    With that constant drone of vuvuzelas, you can't hear a damn thing in that country.

    --
    Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
  13. Re:Digital signal by outsider007 · · Score: 2

    It still might do ok in the right time slot.

    --
    If you mod me down the terrorists will have won
  14. Re:Project security by 0111+1110 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The southern hemisphere is better for radio astronomy and SETI. It has more interesting targets, including the most interesting nearby stars and the galactic center. Also, there are more radio telescopes in the northern hemisphere than in the southern hemisphere already, including Arecibo and the new 500 meter FAST dish being constructed in Southern China.

    --
    Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
  15. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  16. But what if .... by PPH · · Score: 2

    ... they have cable?

    Seriously, most technological societies will probably go through a very brief period where they broadcast megawatt signals all over their planet. Following their adoption of cellular, mesh and other similar low power systems, they will appear to 'go dark' in the RF spectrum to distant observers.

    Now if we can pick up their power grid frequencies, that will be useful. Are they like us good Americans, using 60 Hz? Or commie socialist Europeans with 50 Hz?

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  17. Re:TV and Intelligence? by sconeu · · Score: 2

    Unfortunately, they did not receive the final episode of "Single Female Lawyer"

    --
    General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.