Tourism is Compromising the World's Largest Telescope (wired.com)

Thousands of people moved to let China build and protect Five-Hundred-Meter Aperture Spherical Radio Telescope (FAST), the world's largest telescope. And then the government drew in orders of magnitude more tourists, potentially undercutting its own science in an attempt to promote it. An excerpt: During the four-day Radio Astronomy Forum, Stierwalt and the other astronomers did, finally, get to see the actual telescope, taking a bus up a tight, tortuous road through the karst between town and telescope. As soon as they arrived on site, they were instructed to shut down their phones to protect the instrument from the radio frequency interference. But not even these astronomers, who want pristine FAST data for themselves, could resist pressing that capture button. "Our sweet, sweet tour guide continually reminded us to please turn off our phones," says Stierwalt, "but we all kept taking pictures and sneaking them out because no one really seemed to care." Come on: It's the world's largest telescope.

Maybe their minder stayed lax because a burst here or there wouldn't make much of a difference in those early days. The number of regular tourists allowed at the site all day is capped at 3,000, to limit RFI, and they have to put their phones in lockers before they go see the dish. Krco says the site bumps up against the visitor limit most days. But tourism and development are complicated for a sensitive scientific instrument. Within three miles of the telescope, the government passed legislation establishing a "radio-quiet zone," where RFI-emitting devices are severely restricted. No one (not cellular providers or radio broadcasters) can get a transmitting license, and people entering the facility itself will have their electronics confiscated.

Comments

Telescope mode

[Anonymous Coward]

Aren't these tourists using telescope mode on their phones?

Re:Telescope mode

[Joce640k]

AKA "Airplane mode"? Apparently not.

(And the tour guide seem unaware of it)

I'm sure even the tourists could understand the concept if it was properly explained to them.

Re:Telescope mode

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm not so sure. Go to a museum or a night safari where "no flash photography" is clearly indicated *and* stated verbally by the guide, and you'll still see flashes. Tourists are clueless about their devices.

If they're serious about it, then Airplane mode needs to be set for everyone by the guide, and not merely "properly explained".

Re:Telescope mode

[Joce640k]

Museums let anybody in, no explaining is done.

On a bus full of people it's easy to walk down the isle and look for the airplane symbol on screen.

Yes, there'll be one complete idiot on every bus but you've just reduced the problem by 95%.

Re:Telescope mode

[Anonymous Coward]

Probably the processor processing data, updating the screen, the camera sending the image over the cable, etc. are sufficient to show up in the measurement with the phone close by.

Re: Telescope mode

[Anonymous Coward]

It takes more than airplane mode. Your device radiates rf energy just simply running the cpu. Old style xenon camera flashes produce enormous bursts of wideband radio noise. Some radio telescope facilities only allow disposable 35mm film cameras.

Re:Telescope mode

[Cinnamon Beige]

I'm not so sure. Go to a museum or a night safari where "no flash photography" is clearly indicated *and* stated verbally by the guide, and you'll still see flashes. Tourists are clueless about their devices.

If they're serious about it, then Airplane mode needs to be set for everyone by the guide, and not merely "properly explained".

Or not allow cell phones on the bus, and offer complementary disposable cameras. I've actually managed to have impressed people because my cameras are generally set to have the flash off--in part because I routinely photograph things that are annoyed by flashes and in part because I actually really don't like what it does to my images. (Part of why I'm a bit iffy on switching to a DSLR is because I want one which handles ambient light only well enough that if the flash died it could take me actual, literal years to find out--and given that I tend to like night photography...)

Re:Telescope mode

[Anonymous Coward]

You can pick up a DSLR or mirrorless that doesn't have an internal flash. Mine doesn't. I bought a flash for it cause I figure I may need one, but haven't needed it yet.

Re:Telescope mode

[pjt33]

Part of why I'm a bit iffy on switching to a DSLR is because I want one which handles ambient light only well enough that if the flash died it could take me actual, literal years to find out

Even entry-level DSLRs give you full control over whether to use the flash or underexpose (or, nowadays, whack the auto-ISO up to insane values).

Re:Telescope mode

[rlitman]

My Nikon D7500 has an internal (pop-up) flash, but it has high enough sensitivity that I have never needed the flash for just illumination, whether indoors in dim lighting, or outdoors even at night. I have used the flash however as a fill for when spotty filtered light was on a subject's face leaving a very splotchy almost camo appearance. I also wanted to have the internal flash as an option to trigger optically triggered speedlights, but I have not had the need for that yet.

Re:Telescope mode

[Mikkeles]

Just buy the postcards you cheap fucks!

To limit RFI?

[thoughtlover]

Yeah, that's what they invented Airplane Mode for. I can still use my camera without a single antenna turned on... maybe listen to some Yppah on my earbuds whilst enjoying the high desert air, to boot.

Re:To limit RFI?

[Joce640k]

Plus: You'd think the siftware largest telescope in the world could filter out 3.5GHz during the daytime.

Re:To limit RFI?

[bickerdyke]

Nof if it wants to capture alien WiFi.

Re:To limit RFI?

[toonces33]

Airplane mode does not turn off all of the antennas. GPS is still active on many phones even while in airplane mode.

It does turn off antennas that transmit, although on many flights you can turn WiFi back on so you can pay $$$ to surf the web while flying.

Re:To limit RFI?

[Anonymous Coward]

Some flights even allow turning on Bluetooth. On most flights all the people who jumped on the modern wireless headphone train will have to go without sound though.
And I'm not sure airplane mode turns off NFC (not that it should really matter).

Re:To limit RFI?

[anoko]

While turning a cellphone into airplane mode probably solves the problem for 90%, the digital electronics inside a cellphone that is turned on still cause some RFI. That's why for most radio quiet zones, electronic devices that need to enter the radio quiet zones are carefully tested / selected before bringing them on site.

Re:To limit RFI?

[houghi]

If I am any reference, asking people to use Airplane mode (even if only during landing and takeoff) will not work. Silent? Absolutely.
I will not even turn it off in a hospital. I know surgeons and they SMS and Internet in the operation room all the time.

So you will have to enforce it. Hoever what to do if you forget it? Do you shoot the western tourists whose 10 year old kid forgot and risk an international crisis over it?

And they should not be selling anything to the tourists, as in China many vendors and others use the cellphone for smaller sales, like water or fruit. That will be a problem as well.

Re:To limit RFI?

[The Grim Reefer]

Yeah, that's what they invented Airplane Mode for. I can still use my camera without a single antenna turned on...Â

But how can you get the selfie you just took on Facebook before everyone else if you do that? I mean what's more important here. Some silly science stuff, or getting more likes?

Re:To limit RFI?

[careysub]

Plus: You'd think the siftware largest telescope in the world could filter out 3.5GHz during the daytime.

So, scientists should just not observe the CH bond in molecular clouds, which has spectral lines at 3.4 GHZ because tourists want to gab on their phones?

This assumes that all of the phones that tourists carry are precisely engineered to not emit any signals at all outside of their assigned band, an assumption that is known to be wrong. And it assumes that none of the tourists have multi-mode phones that are emitting at the wrong frequency. We are talking consumer electronics of every variety and quality and (mis)configuration here. Radio telescopes are extremely sensitive, any signal leakage is liable to interfere.

Not sure why you specify "daytime". You know radio telescopes work in the day, right? And that if the object being observed in the sky is only above the horizon in daytime, that they have no choice but to observe it then, right?

Re:To limit RFI?

[Anonymous Coward]

GPS is a receiver not a transmitter

Re:To limit RFI?

[Anonymous Coward]

Tourism basically ruins everything. This isn't much different.

Re:To limit RFI?

[Anonymous Coward]

And they should not be selling anything to the tourists, as in China many vendors and others use the cellphone for smaller sales, like water or fruit. That will be a problem as well.

Vendors will discover from day one that there is no cell tower within range, and quickly realize that they have to install a wired terminal or only accept cash.

Re:To limit RFI?

[Anonymous Coward]

Plus: You'd think the siftware largest telescope in the world could filter out 3.5GHz during the daytime.

So, scientists should just not observe the CH bond in molecular clouds, which has spectral lines at 3.4 GHZ because tourists want to gab on their phones?

This assumes that all of the phones that tourists carry are precisely engineered to not emit any signals at all outside of their assigned band, an assumption that is known to be wrong. And it assumes that none of the tourists have multi-mode phones that are emitting at the wrong frequency. We are talking consumer electronics of every variety and quality and (mis)configuration here. Radio telescopes are extremely sensitive, any signal leakage is liable to interfere.

Not sure why you specify "daytime". You know radio telescopes work in the day, right? And that if the object being observed in the sky is only above the horizon in daytime, that they have no choice but to observe it then, right?

You assume that the populace knows enough to avoid voting for science-denying politicians...

Re:To limit RFI?

[Joce640k]

Not sure why you specify "daytime".

Because that's when the tourists are active.

You know radio telescopes work in the day, right?

You know they work much better at night, right? ie. Pointing away from the big yellow ball thing.

And that if the object being observed in the sky is only above the horizon in daytime, that they have no choice but to observe it then, right?

Sure, apart from the other choice, ie. wait six months (which is something that happens all the time in Astronomy because of the big yellow ball being in the way for half the year).

Re:To limit RFI?

[Joce640k]

Did you know that the in-flight regulations governing cellphones are FCC rules, not FAA rules?

(fast-moving cellphones at high altitude cause havoc in the cell-tower system)

The rules also help prevent air-rage so the airlines don't fight them too hard. The last thing people want is some loud-mouth yakking next to them the whole time.

Re:To limit RFI?

[thebes]

You do realize even receivers need an LO, right?

Re: To limit RFI?

[Anonymous Coward]

If you think "airplane mode" makes any cell phone as RF quiet as a brick, you would be sorely mistaken.

Re: To limit RFI?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, and if they are observing a specific event, that event may be over in 6 months, but hey....at least some tourist didn't have to be deprived of their phone for a few hours, right?

Re:To limit RFI?

[Austerity Empowers]

So, scientists should just not observe the CH bond in molecular clouds, which has spectral lines at 3.4 GHZ because tourists want to gab on their phones?

There's no question that the telescope needs a quiet space around it and needs to only be filtered based upon what it's looking at. But I think they might need to consider a "tourist area" which happens to be an RF absorbing cage. Having a terrestrial telescope does come with a few built in disadvantages. When it's also expensive and disruptive, that baggage gets worse. People are going to be suspicious about what their already pretty shady government is up to with their money.

Re:To limit RFI?

[oic0]

They should just have a detector on the busses that warns if a cell is broadcasting. Don't start rolling until the warning light goes off.... How hard is that?

Re: To limit RFI?

[LordKronos]

You know they work much better at night, right? ie. Pointing away from the big yellow ball thing.

You know I'm always forgetting, so please remind me which frequency is "yellow" and where does that fall in the EM spectrum?

FYI - radio emissions from the sun are extremely weak, and radio telescopes are using during daylight hours all the time

Re: To limit RFI?

[Joce640k]

It's unlikely that "the CH bond in molecular clouds" will be a particular event.

Particular events are things like gamma bursts, which aren't at 3.5MHz.

Re:To limit RFI?

[Anonymous Coward]

If only they had some sort of really sensitive RF detector that could pinpoint where these signals were coming from so they could deal with phone smugglers properly!

Re: To limit RFI?

[anoko]

Radio emissions from the sun are not at all weak -- at most frequencies the Sun is the brightest source in the sky, stronger than CasA and CygA. You are right that daytime observing is possible with radio telescopes, but night time data is generally more valuable.

Re:To limit RFI?

[burtosis]

If only we had invented a technology for taking pictures that didn't require batteries or circuits.

Re:To limit RFI?

[Zorpheus]

I think the old style flash is worse than a phone in flight mode

Re:To limit RFI?

[Anonymous Coward]

There were OLD style flashes before that don't require electricity either

Re:To limit RFI?

[PPH]

What kind of flash would I have to use to illuminate a 500 meter object?

Re:To limit RFI?

[Zorpheus]

I don't know, but I would really worry about the electromagnetic intereference when that capacitor discharges through that floodlight.

Re: To limit RFI?

[Anonymous Coward]

Even though the sun is the brightest rf object, that doesn't mean it isn't weak. Have you ever tried receiving sun noise on vhf or uhf with a beam antenna? It is nearly impossible. Receiving it on microwave is slightly easier.

Re: To limit RFI?

[Anonymous Coward]

ALL receivers are also transmitters. That's why the original flight ban was for AM/FM radio receivers. An FM radio's local oscillator transmits in the VOR radionavigation beacon band.

Re:To limit RFI?

[Solandri]

There are two ways to build a radio telescope. One is to maximize its size by creating an interferometer. This is done by mounting two or more radio dishes as far apart as possible, then synchronizing the signals they receive. That gives you the resolving power of a radio dish as large as the separation of the dishes. In other words, you get a radio telescope able to resolve extremely fine detail at radio wavelengths.

The other is to maximize surface area. A circle actually has the smallest diameter for a given area, so this gives you the minimum resolving power. But the large surface area maximizes sensitivity - it can pick out especially faint signals. So for this radio telescope to effectively leverage its strength, its surroundings need to be very quiet at radio frequencies.

Re:To limit RFI?

[burtosis]

If only we had a ginormous fusion reactor casting light on if, but far enough away - say 93M miles or so.

Re:To limit RFI?

[Anonymous Coward]

Radio astronomer here. I usually wouldn't worry about this. Most radio observatories have electronic equipment that hasn't been explicitly tested for RFI. It's usually only radio transmitters - phones, laptops with wi-fi, wireless mice, etc. - that are a problem. So setting phones to flight mode should be sufficient (though the tour guide may not have understood that).

Some exceptions exist, though. Experiments trying to detect faint spectral signatures, like the epoch of reionisation, are more vulnerable to RFI, and need more closely-vetted sites. And I suspect that a camera flash would interfere with certain types of observations.

Offhand, I don't know whether FAST (the telescope in this story) would fall into the first or second category.

Re: To limit RFI?

[Anonymous Coward]

By conservation of energy, the signal emitted by an oscillator is never stronger than the GPS/radio signal it is picking up. In the case of AM radio, a well-designed receiver would then amplify the 20-20000 Hz signal from the oscillator. There is no reason to amplify the carrier frequency.

Re:To limit RFI?

[anoko]

Singe dish telescopes generally fall into the second category of observatories that are affected by low-level RFI, and I'm pretty sure that holds for FAST. But even for e.g. the Murchison RA observatory that only has interferometers, they do test equipment beforehand, because they are a problem. ( I'm also a radio astronomer )

Re:To limit RFI?

[smi.james.th]

This - but also. I work at MeerKAT, and our receivers can pick up the CPU clocks of cellphones (~1.4 GHz is quite common cellphone clock frequency, it also happens to be right where we want to observe), even when they're on flight-mode.

Fortunately our facility isn't much of a tourist place.

people moved??? LOL

[OzPeter]

Thousands of people moved to let China build and protect Five-Hundred-Meter Aperture Spherical Radio Telescope

Orly?!?!? People in China moved because they are very nice and wanted to help out the government??!?!

BWHAHAHAHAHAHA

Now let's look at an actual quote from TFA (yeah, I know .. I actually read it. And emphasis is mine)

The country even forcibly relocated thousands of villagers who lived nearby, so their modern trappings wouldn’t interfere with the new prized instrument.

Chinese leadership doesn't believe in science...

[Anonymous Coward]

It believes in money.
It routinely shoots itself in the foot for a few RMB.
Pollutes its lands.
Poisons its people.
Maintains a death grip on its culture in the name of social cohesion.
It honestly thinks that it can continue this way and outlast every other civilization in the world.
Its young males are too unhealthy that its own military doesn't want them.
Its delusional and that makes it dangerous.

Re:people moved??? LOL

[OzPeter]

This would never happen in the US because of the Second Amendment. Can you imagine what would happen if the US government seized private land for a public project? Why, there would be so many people exercising their Second Amendment rights they would never even try! That is what our Founded Famers meant when they created the Second Amendment!

Unless you have missed a /s from your comment it sounds like you have never heard of Eminent Domain https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Re:people moved??? LOL

[Anonymous Coward]

Ever hear of 'eminent domain'?
The government can and does forcibly expropriate pretty much at will. Compensation is given, amounts clarified if needed by the courts.

Re: people moved??? LOL

[Anonymous Coward]

Anything that makes government afraid of us is just fine.

Government Will Do Science When It Wants

[careysub]

In an authoritarian state, that could forcibly relocate thousands to build the telescope, decides it wants to actually do science, as opposed to promoting its project, it can impose the effective EM silence that is needed. Simply enforce the existing no-electronics zone, collecting all non-conforming electronics at the zone edge. I am sure they can offer "selfie services" at the telescope for a price, downloadable at home. This is an easy fix for them.

Re:Government Will Do Science When It Wants

[Anonymous Coward]

Nothing new here. At the Green Bank Observatory in West Virginia the tourist shop sells single use film cameras that are allowed to be used while in close proximity to the receiving dishes. Film cameras with analog light meters are the only ones allowed while close to the receiving dishes. Note that modern electronic devices emit low levels of microwave radiation while not intentionally transmitting. Airplane mode is simply not good enough.

Re:Government Will Do Science When It Wants

[Anonymous Coward]

Another win for my old Spotmatic F, although some of the lenses are slightly radioactive because thorium glass was some great glass back then.

Re:Government Will Do Science When It Wants

[OzPeter]

So much for my F100 .. looks like I'll be back to my Holga.

Re:people moved??? LOL

[Minupla]

Oh? Check out this article:

https://www.washingtonian.com/...

But the localsâ"whose farms and homes had been condemned and displaced to make room for the observatoryâ(TM)s campusâ"didnâ(TM)t take so kindly to the influx

Re:people moved??? LOL

[mlw4428]

The phrase "Farming Famers" and over-the-top rhetoric makes it clear he's a Troll. Do not feed the Troll.

New business opportunity

[willy_me]

rent out old SLR film cameras at the start of the tour.

Re:New business opportunity

[fabioalcor]

Or transparent Faraday cages.

Re:people moved??? LOL

[110010001000]

Oh yeah:


/s

Re:people moved??? LOL

[110010001000]

Farming Farmers? Fascinating. Very insightful. You must be trolling. I never said that.

Re:people moved??? LOL

[Applehu Akbar]

This would never happen in the US because of the Second Amendment.

No, this would never happen in the US because someone would declare the site 'sacred' or claim that the project emits radiation of some kind. We don't do science any more, which is why we have to be tourists in China if we want to visit some research.

Re:people moved??? LOL

[110010001000]

But mah guns!

And the lesson here is:

[king neckbeard]

And the lesson here is that you should build the world's SECOND largest telescope. Almost as good technically, and far fewer tourists.

Re:And the lesson here is:

[GuB-42]

Reminds me of a quote from Contact

First rule in government spending: why build one when you can have two at twice the price? Only, this one can be kept secret.

Re:And the lesson here is:

[magarity]

And the lesson here is that you should build the world's SECOND largest telescope. Almost as good technically, and far fewer tourists.

Didn't you read the article? The main point is not to do actual astronomy but to draw tourists to Astronomy Town nearby.

Not how it happened

[thunderclees]

"Thousands of people moved to let China build and protect Five-Hundred-Meter Aperture Spherical Radio Telescope (FAST), the world's largest telescope"
No that's not correct, thousands were dragged out of their homes in the wee hours of the morning just before the bulldozers flattened the house. If they dod leave the bulldozers flattened them anyway.

Re:Not how it happened

[Gavagai80]

Reality check: the villagers were of course notified far in advance and offered 12,000-22,000 yuan cash or new housing as compensation. Many feel it wasn't fair compensation, and no doubt it wasn't for some since the payouts apparently didn't account for differing property values, but so it goes.

Re:Not how it happened

[thunderclees]

Thanks for the sanitized version.
Does PRC shill work pay well?
None of the news outlets report housing as compensation, or cash, just a check for $1800.
What do you think happens to villagers who refuse to leave their house for $1800?
Bulldozers at dawn...just like in Beijing.

Re:people moved??? LOL

[Anonymous Coward]

They learned that spin from CNN.

Re: people moved??? LOL

[Anonymous Coward]

There is an equivalent of this in the US. It's called the National Radio Quiet Zone. The most restrictive areas of the zone are in West Virginia.

How do they even

[fisted]

Can someone explain why the scope doesn't seem to have anything in its focal point?

Re:How do they even

[PPH]

It does. A small receiver structure supported by cables from the surrounding towers. It's difficult to see in TFA pictures. Maybe someone should go there and snap some more.

Re:How do they even

[fisted]

Oh, thanks. Found some other picture, the receiver is very visible in TFA, it's just lowered down

Re: Flash the monkey??!!?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why would the monkey be offended by nudity?

Maybe he was hungry and just wanted a banana....

FCC vs FAA

[sjbe]

Did you know that the in-flight regulations governing cellphones are FCC rules, not FAA rules?

Some are but not all. Both the FCC and FAA have relevant regulations impacting use.

The last thing people want is some loud-mouth yakking next to them the whole time.

I sometimes get that even without cell phones...

Re:people moved??? LOL

[sky_kasper]

Lots of countries force people to move so that they can build what they want

Re:people moved??? LOL

[Anonymous Coward]

Eminent domain is in the Constitution, slapnuts.

LOL...figures

[p51d007]

Build and they will come, but leave your stupid phone at home. YEAH RIGHT. People would rather leave their kids/dogs/relatives in a car, than be without their phones for a few seconds. Personally, I'd rather have my good d-SLR, than a silly phone to take photos. Plus, they build this out in the middle of nowhere, to escape the RFI from towns, and now they are building up the area, and it will screw up the radio receiver. Good thinking!

Re:LOL...figures

[Anonymous Coward]

yo, dumbass, a DSLR is just as bad as a cell phone. either use a single-use disposable film camera or an ancient mechanical SLR.

Re:people moved??? LOL

[OzPeter]

Lots of countries force people to move so that they can build what they want

Yeah but msmash painted this one as a voluntary relocation.

Re:people moved??? LOL

[OzPeter]

Troll is being Troll

Re:people moved??? LOL

[drew_kime]

Thousands of people moved to let China build and protect Five-Hundred-Meter Aperture Spherical Radio Telescope

Orly?!?!? People in China moved because they are very nice and wanted to help out the government??!?!

BWHAHAHAHAHAHA

Now let's look at an actual quote from TFA (yeah, I know .. I actually read it. And emphasis is mine)

The country even forcibly relocated thousands of villagers who lived nearby, so their modern trappings wouldn’t interfere with the new prized instrument.

Possible non-evil explanation: What they meant was, "Thousands of people were moved ..."

I will take ...

[PPH]

... as many pictures as I damned well please.

Oops, put it where no wants to visit

[foxalopex]

I suppose the only real solution is to put radio telescopes in places that no one wants to visit or is super difficult to visit.

Faraday

[Anonymous Coward]

What about simply putting all the tourists in a giant Faraday cage (image domed walkways and areas)? It has the add bonus of not having to hire hundreds of security guards to babysit them either since they literally can't stray off the path.

Re:people moved??? LOL

[drew_kime]

Possible non-evil explanation: What they meant was, "Thousands of people were moved ..."

Hold on, that would have made sense in a headline where "unnecessary" words are dropped all the time. But this was in the text, so ... yeah, that's bullshit.

How about the moon?

[drinkypoo]

Instead of sending humans to the moon, can we send a radio telescope array?

"We've come to see the giant bowl"

[Tablizer]

Oh, just wok on in...

If we're going to exclude words from the acronym..

[Anonymous Coward]

we could have called it (FART)

Easy solution....

[WorBlux]

Set up a kiosk at the entrance to rent out Polaroid instant film cameras.

Re:Easy solution....

[Antique Geekmeister]

They're also being manufactured again, along with the film. See https://www.fastcompany.com/40...