Slashdot Mirror


Massive Construction Effort Begins For World's Largest Telescope

An anonymous reader writes with this selection from a press release issued by the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics: "Astronomers have begun to blast 3 million cubic feet of rock from a mountaintop in the Chilean Andes to make room for what will be the world's largest telescope when completed near the end of the decade. The telescope will be located at the Carnegie Institution's Las Campanas Observatory-one of the world's premier astronomical sites, known for its pristine conditions and clear, dark skies. Over the next few months, more than 70 controlled blasts will break up the rock while leaving a solid bedrock foundation for the telescope and its precision scientific instruments."

7 of 74 comments (clear)

  1. uhm by Real_Reddox · · Score: 5, Funny

    Astronomers have begun to blast 3 million cubic feet of rock

    I think you'll find that the people blasting rock aren't astronomers...

    --
    I spent five minutes stealing cool sigs and all I got was this.
  2. Re:Ground vs Space by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Most optical observations are done by the ground-based ones. They're more available (there's more of them than there are of the Hubble), flexible, and they're enormous.

    What recent stories are you talking about? Among big media ones, I recall some supernova stuff (ground-based telescopes), dark matter stuff in Abell 520 (ground-based Canada France Hawaii telescope and Hubble), and of course planet stuff (ground-based telescopes). Of stuff that doesn't make it to the media, the bulk of optical observing comes from the ground-based ones.

    For the same price as a large space-based telescope, you can build a much larger ground-based one. You have to contend with atmosphere (which is why they're always on mountains), but we're getting better at dealing with that. Space-based telescopes make a trade-off: less light gathering as they're smaller, but potentially higher resolution/clarity as you don't have to deal with the atmosphere.

    Non-optical telescopes are different though. The atmosphere is quite opaque to much of the non-optical spectrum; far-infrared, X-Ray, and Gamma Ray instruments do best outside the atmosphere. The microwave observatories are out there as well, though I think that's more to avoid noise than atmospheric opacity, as the CMB is very weak.

  3. "Ludicrous Speed" by zrbyte · · Score: 5, Funny
    I just love the naming convention of these telescopes. The guys in the organizational committee must have been watching too much Spaceballs

    There's the Very Large Optical Telescope, then there's the Overwhelmingly Large Telescope and the European Extremely Large Telescope. What's next? Ridiculously Large Telescope?

    1. Re:"Ludicrous Speed" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      They've gone to PLAID! (Particularly Large Array of Independent Dishes)

  4. Re:Why not on Nullarbor Plain? by TapeCutter · · Score: 5, Informative

    It's only marginally above sea level, so the atmosphere is too thick for proffesionals. It is however a wonderful sight for the unaided eye.

    --
    And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
  5. Re:Ground vs Space by mrsquid0 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is largely an illusion. Most space-based telescopes are run either by NASA or ESA, and both of those organizations have very large public relations offices. These offices issue a lot of press releases and put a lot of effort into getting results from their satellites into the media. The Space Telescope Science Institute was one of the pioneers of this approach to popularizing astronomy, and they were very successful at it. Ground-based observatories tend not to have big public outreach budgets, and usually do not have large numbers of people dedicated to getting their results into the media, so we do not see their results on the front pages of the New York Times or the Economist as often.

    Space- and ground-based observatories generally do very different things and complement each other instead of compete with each other. For example, I have used ground-based observatories to take spectra of very faint sources and combined them with X-ray, ultraviolet, and optical observations from Swift and Hubble. The science that comes out of these observations would be impossible without observatories both on the ground and in orbit.

    --
    Just because you are paranoid does not mean that no-one is out to get you.
  6. Re:It'll be the largest optical telescope, IF... by Shag · · Score: 5, Informative

    Yep, of course. In fact, the telescope I run at my job had "the largest monolithic mirror ever made" from 1999 until 2004 (when Roger Angel started cranking out 8.4-meter ones). Wasn't considered the largest telescope, of course, because segmented 10-meter mirrors of the Keck twins (1992 and 1996) next door to it were larger overall, just segmented.

    That said, using the phrase "world's largest" in the headline before the first concrete pour invites comments like mine. ;)

    --
    Village idiot in some extremely smart villages.