Slashdot Mirror


Astronomy Portfolio Review Recommends Defunding US's Biggest Telescope

derekmead writes "Data from the enormous Green Bank Telescope at the National Radio Astronomy Observatory has been used to test some of Einstein's theories, discover new molecules in space, and find evidence of the building blocks of life and of the origins of galaxies. With 6,600 hours of observation time a year, the GBT produces massive amounts of data on the makeup of space, and any researchers with reason to use the data are welcome to do so. The eleven-year-old GBT stands as one of the crowning achievements of American big science. But with the National Science Foundation strapped for cash like most other science-minded government agencies, the NRAO's funding is threatened. In August of this year, the Astronomy Portfolio Review, a committee appointed by the NSF, recommended that the GBT be defunded over the next five years. Researchers, along with locals and West Virginia congressmen, are fighting the decision, which puts the nearly $100 million telescope at risk. Unless they succeed, America's giant dish will go silent."

41 of 192 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Good by Soilworker · · Score: 2

    In your dream, everybody know they will put the money in they shitty army based on quantity instead of quality.

  2. Re:Good by MightyYar · · Score: 2

    $10 million? I don't think that's going to feed and treat as many as you think.

    --
    W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
  3. Silent? by gstoddart · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Unless they succeed, America's giant dish will go silent

    OK, I know I'm being a bit of a pedant ... but it's listening, it's already silent. ;-)

    That being said, this sucks ... the amount of actual science we do seem to keep falling. But we've got money to teach Creationism in schools.

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    1. Re:Silent? by fustakrakich · · Score: 2

      Creationism is all we'll have left to teach after real science is defunded and the church gets all the money instead.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    2. Re:Silent? by Jeng · · Score: 2

      That is an interesting thought. Teach the wrong things to children because it is cheaper than teaching facts.

      Shit, so that is why the Republicans are so for "teaching the controversy", it makes so much sense now.

      --
      Don't know something? Look it up. Still don't know? Then ask.
    3. Re:Silent? by StormReaver · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But we've got money to teach Creationism in schools

      Teaching Creationism doesn't require any money...or evidence....or logic...or intelligence....or anything else. It's dirt cheap to teach, as it relies only upon what someone wants to believe at any given moment in time.

      Real universal-level science, on the other hand, is very expensive. It requires the ability to make observations, the attention to detail and time necessary to evaluate and collate enormous amounts of data, the ability to accurately spot and eliminate flawed data, and a tremendous ability to arrive at logical conclusions based on said valid data. And it requires a LOT of money to build and maintain facilities needed to acquire such data.

      To summarize:

      Teaching Fantasy: Dirt Cheap.
      Expanding Human Knowledge: Not Dirt Cheap.

    4. Re:Silent? by fustakrakich · · Score: 2

      ...so that is why the Republicans are so...

      I see no significant opposition from the democrats, so there's no point in trying to discuss only half the picture.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    5. Re:Silent? by interkin3tic · · Score: 3, Insightful

      the amount of actual science we do seem to keep falling.

      From my perspective it seems the opposite. I'm a biologist, more powerful tools are coming out faster than I can keep up with them. When I started my PhD, the microscope we had was really nice. By the end, it was essentially obsolete. It was a laser scanning confocal, a spinning disc was installed next door that was much faster and a super-resolution microscope was on it's way. That was a few months ago.

      There are potential budget cuts looming unless the tea party and republicans suddenly decide they'd rather cooperate with Obama and be rational. And that is annoying and stupid, but look at the funding for the national institute of health, which sponsors a lot of biology research. 1993-2009 and 2004 to 2012. It's up pretty significantly in the last decade.

    6. Re:Silent? by SlippyToad · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I see no significant opposition from the democrats, so there's no point in trying to discuss only half the picture.

      No because they've only been trying to keep the fuckwit retards of the Teabag Party from shutting down our entire country for the last two years.

      While I'm admittedly bothered by this, this is a direct result of caving to the "we're too BROOOOOKE" mythology of the retard right that can always find a hundred billion or two to start a fucking war, but has a full-blown hissyfit meltdown when someone tries to fund health insurance for poor kids.

      In other words, you don't see any significant oppo from the Dems because they've been fighting a gridlocked, deliberately-sabotaged government for several years now.

      But, trying to actually understand what is going on in your little world is probably too much effort, judging from the laziness of your thinking.

      --
      One day I feel I'm ahead of the wheel / the next it's rolling over me / I can get back on / I can get back on
  4. Re:Good by i+kan+reed · · Score: 2

    And what is basic science today will feed millions in the future. I'm not saying this particular telescope will provide the insights necessary to advance overall economic productivity, but once shut down, it definitely won't.

  5. Not just the GBT by mendelrat · · Score: 5, Informative

    Not just the GBT is at risk in all of this, and honestly NRAO is being selfish and shortsighted in their responses to the portfolio review. There are 5 optical telescopes at the national observatory at Kitt Peak, AZ that are set to be divested from the NSF as well, and their loss is much, much more devastating to the amount of open-access telescope time that is set to be lost if the facilities are closed or go into closed private partnerships. The closing of the Very Long Baseline Array (VLBA) means the loss of literally a one-of-a-kind setup as well. It's bad across all parts of the electromagnetic spectrum, but the decision to stop spending money on these telescopes preserves the NSF astronomy grants program which funds a ton of astronomers, engineers, and students of all levels (myself included). The portfolio review didn't come up with any answers that we liked, but at least it's an honest estimate of what we have vs. what we expect funding wise; things are getting even worse with the upcoming budget sequestration. The big worry among astronomers is that we're returning to a time when only large institutions have access to telescope time, the exact reasoning behind the creation of the US national observatory system in the first place. Public-private partnerships will likely come around somehow to keep these facilities operating, but it's early still to know what those will entail in terms of open-access telescope time.

    1. Re:Not just the GBT by tizan · · Score: 3, Informative

      Just a clarification: NRAO manages only the GBT and VLBA ..the optical telescopes are managed by a sister institute NOAO (note the O for optical).
      So NRAO at best can fight/defend the cases for GBT and VLBA only.

      Yes sucks big time for everybody though as even small funds for hardware/instrument development for astronomy at universities is recommended to be defunded.

    2. Re:Not just the GBT by mendelrat · · Score: 2

      Yes, NRAO and NOAO are very different and in charge of different things.

      But contrast NRAO's initial response (here) to that of NOAO (here) or even AURA (here, sorry its a PDF) to see the different approaches that are possible.

      NRAO essentially criticize the portfolio review process and reject the results outright without consideration and essentially hopes that the NSF figures out a better way: "AUI and NRAO encourage the NSF to work with its other federal agency counterparts to consider a more balanced approach with additional funding scenarios for the entire U.S. federal astronomy portfolio." Compare that to NOAO's response which creates an online discussion point, lays out specific details about each relevant point, encourages all astronomers to talk to their congress people, as well as making observations about the situation between NRAO and ALMA being similar to NOAO and LSST.

      This isn't a time to complain about losing one or two specific facilities, this is a time for talking about the entire picture of how bad this would really be if divestment goes through and facilities are either closed or put into private (closed) consortiums. NRAO's response honestly comes across as sour grapes defending their own stuff with little concern of the greater picture.

    3. Re:Not just the GBT by mendelrat · · Score: 2

      Note that I had a wrong link to AURA's response (still a PDF though)

  6. Private Enterprise... by michael_rendier · · Score: 2

    I'm hoping we are learning to take science (particularly space in this case) out of the 'gov't' sector...if this telescope was privately funded, they wouldn't have to be dealing with partisan crap based on ideological 'budgets'...politics...but that's the price for receiving 'public funding'...*shrugs*

    --
    There are three kinds of people in the world. Those that can count, and those that can't.
    1. Re:Private Enterprise... by Jeng · · Score: 2

      Ok, so how exactly do you make money off of this?

      This type of research is funded by the government because there is no incentive for private enterprise to do something like this because there is no way to profit off of this.

      --
      Don't know something? Look it up. Still don't know? Then ask.
    2. Re:Private Enterprise... by circletimessquare · · Score: 2

      it's worse than that. the great republican governor of new jersey killed funding for a new tunnel between manhattan and midtown. it's expensive. apparently more expensive than the quality of life of thousands of new jersey residents who commute to manhattan

      but there's no business case for it in a short sighted, easily quantified bottom line oriented way. but certain free market fundamentalist idiots believe this is the only valid way to look at any question of government policy. their stupid quasireligion of the free market will surely destroy this great nation

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    3. Re:Private Enterprise... by circletimessquare · · Score: 2

      "obfuscant" is right

      a nation's budget doesn't work like a household's budget

      here, start with an education:

      http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/28/opinion/krugman-europes-austerity-madness.html

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  7. First its cuts to the legion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    First its cuts to fund the Platonic schools. Then its limits on what can be said at the agora (nothing bad can be said about senators or Caesar). Then its cuts to the Legion. You change their breakfast diet, then you go for lower quality swords and shields. Then you ask that they join the legion with their own sword and shield. In a few short years, you go from ruling the world, to losing Brittania, then Gaul, and finally fighting off the Hun, and ultimately watching Rome burn. But start off by being cheap with the scholars. That's right. We already know all there is to know. Oh, by the way, are those proposing cuts from Crete? They seem like Cretans.

    1. Re:First its cuts to the legion by CRCulver · · Score: 2

      First its cuts to fund the Platonic schools...

      That part of the Roman Empire that eradicated classical Platonic education (Byzantium) managed to last another thousand years -- and with high literacy rates and intact trading links with the rest of the world -- after the Western Roman Empire fell. If you want to propose a slippery slope, that's not the best start.

  8. Re:Good by Desler · · Score: 2

    Yeah because the corporate bureaucrats in the insurance companies are clearly non-biased when it comes to health care decisions.

  9. Re:Good by fustakrakich · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Oh please! Stop with this delusion. The money will end up in some banker's pocket, just like every other time a cutback is made.

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
  10. Re:Good by NFN_NLN · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Good. That's a lot of money to be used to feed and provide health care to people.

    In your dream, everybody know they will put the money in they shitty army based on quantity instead of quality.

    You're both being silly... children and their education are what matters if the future of America has any chance. This money will be rightfully used to re-write text books to include creationism as a valid science.

  11. preservation of the human race by confused+one · · Score: 4, Funny

    Of course they're cutting funding. Green Banks has come close to finding the aliens living in orbit around a couple of nearby stars on several occasions. Damn close. The government needs to cut funding to prevent identification of the aliens --- the powers that be are aware of the aliens and know what kind of retribution they will bring on the Earth if humans become aware of "other" species existence. There has been very limited contact through Air Force satellites. The aliens have made their intentions very clear: As long as we remain a quaint backwater planet with no ability to travel off the small rock we live on, we are not a threat. As soon as we become a threat, the simplest course of action is to exterminate all life on the planet (that would be us). If Green Banks manages to identify the aliens, noone will be able to keep it quiet. It will drive interest in space exploration, funding for the space program, development of space vessels and then the genie is out of the bottle, so to speak. It cannot be allowed to happen. So, it is the Government's intention to quash funding for NRO and NASA, for the preservation of the human race.

  12. Re:Noisy Telescopes by NixieBunny · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I sleep under a radio telescope (the SMT on Mt. Graham) when I'm on site for several days. It creaks and groans like an old pirate ship.

    --
    The determined Real Programmer can write Fortran programs in any language.
  13. So how else do you do this? by Ravensfire · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Isn't this the way it should be working? Allocate X dollars to group. Group really needs X + Y dollars to do everything they want so they create a group to review all the projects and allocate the dollars. If you don't have enough funding, programs WILL be cut or scaled back. Save program A and program B is cut, which costs jobs around program B. Congrats though, program A's jobs are intact.

    Prioritization sucks but if you don't have all the funding you need you have to make the call at some point. Having a (theoretically neutral) group review everything and make the call is better than having Congress make the decisions for you. And yeah, it would be much better for everyone if there was enough funding, that's the easy way out of this dilemma.

    -- Ravensfire

    --
    "But we decide which is right, and which is an illusion"
    1. Re:So how else do you do this? by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 3, Informative

      Here's a crazy idea or two ...

      1. You know, maybe they could stop wasting money on an inanimate object called "terror". And/or stop trying to kill people who think different.
      http://freemarketmojo.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/dat2010mint.jpg

      2. Or maybe stop wasting money on undeployed and under-developed tech ...
      http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2012/06/how-to-blow-6-billion-on-a-tech-project/

      "cost growth and execution problems were based on the fact that no GMR radios were ever even tested by potential users until 2010. After 13 years in the pipeline, what those users saw was a radio that weighed as much as a drill sergeant, took too long to set up, failed frequently, and didn't have enough range."

      Nah, that's just crazy talk ...

  14. Re:Good by Lunix+Nutcase · · Score: 2

    He's long since dead. Had a pre-existing condition that his insurance company refused to pay for and he couldn't afford the costs himself.

  15. GBT by Stele · · Score: 3, Funny

    I can't help but think it would be better funded if it had some lesbians too.

  16. Re:Good by Thorodin · · Score: 2

    Actually, capitalism on the whole, has been pretty darn good for the world.

  17. Re:Good by ColdWetDog · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Actually, capitalism on the whole, has been pretty darn good for the world.

    (Looks around)

    Checks CO2 levels.
    Checks water purity.
    Checks air pollution levels.
    Evaluates pesticides in food. ...

    Looks at doctor's bill.

    Yep, pretty good. If you define 'good' as maximal help for a limited class of human beings at the expense of large swaths of the population and the planet.

    --
    Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  18. Re:Noisy Telescopes by ColdWetDog · · Score: 4, Funny

    Wow, I knew science funding was bad but this is incredible.

    Can't they find you a pup tent or something?

    Maybe you could sleep in your car?

    --
    Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  19. Naming it after Byrd didn't help by schwit1 · · Score: 2

    Having Bob Byrd or Bud Shuster's name on any project implies it had no redeeming value other than helping the pol get reelected. Thankfully both are gone.

  20. A bit of history by Urban+Garlic · · Score: 3, Informative

    So this unit has a bit of history -- there used to be a 300-foot diameter transit telescope on the site, which collapsed in 1988. The Byrd telescope was an upgrade, being fully steerable and covering more of the spectrum. The location is fairly special too, it's in a radio-quiet zone with some other NRAO telescopes, and close to the Navy's radio observatory site.

    The thing only started working in August of 2000, it seems a shame to shut it down after such a small fraction of its expected operating lifetime.

    --
    2*3*3*3*3*11*251
  21. Misspending by slapout · · Score: 2

    Maybe if they didn't spend so much money on other things they could afford to keep it.

    --
    Coder's Stone: The programming language quick ref for iPad
  22. Re:Good by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "fund the things I like and stick it to the other people" is exactly how we got to the present situation.

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  23. Re:Good by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 2

    Yep, pretty good. If you define 'good' as maximal help for a limited class of human beings at the expense of large swaths of the population and the planet.

    Well one should expect that capitalism is good, if not very good for the capitalists. Unfortunately, for those who have to work for the capitalists, a different story emerges.

    Capitalism is very much like Darwin's survival of the fittest. Both favor the most successful at the expense of everybody else. There is a reason why in the early 20th century there were a lot of anti-trust laws created. The good of the people required protection from the most successful capitalists. There is also a reason why now, most of those laws are ignored. The good of the corporation is now above the good of the people.

    Unfortunately, today, people ignorantly shout capitalism when the reality is fascism and today's "capitalists" are actually fascists.

  24. Re:Good by Penguinisto · · Score: 2

    No, the VA is in worse shape because it's run by a lot of government employees. While there are some folks in there who really do their best to provide decent care (and some have managed to pull of miracles), the reason the VA falls down a lot? Because of the '7:30-4:30' mentality. Most of the employees there are just marking time (while getting one hell of a paycheck for doing so), and resent any/all intrusions into their day or their processes (like, you know, patients who need care?) More often than not, the process and attendant bureaucratic attitude is the biggest hindrance.

    How do I know? My missus is a disabled veteran. Watching her fight with the pharmacy because they botched an delivery date for the umpteenth time is no fun (we're talking insulin and high-octane pain prescriptions here, not aspirin), and that's just the tip of one very ugly iceberg.

    Having seen fully-US-government-run healthcare up close and personal? Let's just say that no matter how good Canada or the UK does it, I know full well that here in the US, we'll just fuck it up, and to the detriment of anyone who will have to suffer under it.

    --
    Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
  25. Re:Good by TheSync · · Score: 2

    If you define 'good' as maximal help for a limited class of human beings at the expense of large swaths of the population and the planet.

    Actually global poverty has recently been falling rapidly, mostly due to the adoption of capitalism in China.

    The poor countries that display the greatest success today in poverty reduction are those that engage the most with the global capitalist economy.

  26. At least our troops are cool... by DancesWithWolves · · Score: 2

    Air Conditioning the Military Costs More Than NASA's entire Budget: http://gizmodo.com/5813257/air-conditioning-our-military-costs-more-than-nasas-entire-budget
    That says a lot about this country and where it's headed. It has no problem cooling troops in a war that has no purpose and no end, even when "we are broke!". But funding anything that might be remotely useful? Forget it!

  27. Re:Noisy Telescopes by Shag · · Score: 2

    Most telescopes on Mauna Kea are relatively quiet, both in terms of the mount moving and the dome rotating. Sometimes you'll hear a creak, or a clunk as a contact switch gets tripped or a chain moves to open or close something. One exception is Japan's Subaru Telescope, which when the dome drives are turned on plays a recurring audible alert in the area of the dome - Bwoop! Bwoop! "Warning! Dome drives are on! Dome could move at any moment!" (and then repeating it in Japanese).

    --
    Village idiot in some extremely smart villages.