The Astronomy division at the NSF (who is really the first to do a strategic review of existing projects like this) has made the interesting argument that this process will help them get more money. The theory of change is: "In order to get more money, we have to show that we have trimmed as much as we can from the existing program. If we are running a lean, mean, science-machine, we can effectively argue for more funding."
I find this an interesting idea, we'll see if it works. -Miguel F. Morales
As a radio astrophysicist, I have to chime in to say that the Senior Review by the NSF (and the associated potential close of Arecibo) is a ballsy move and absolute the right thing to do. This is good governance.
In response to the first post, the operating cost of Arecibo is $12M per year.
The basic problem is that there are a number of very exciting new projects people want to build, but in an era of flat funding profiles you have to make hard decisions and close something before you can open something else. The Senior Review is made up of senior astronomers, and is how the NSF makes these decisions.
The Senior Review also recommended cutting back a number of other facilities, including the Very Long Baseline Array (world's highest resolution images, but only of bright objects), and Kitt Peak, Sacramento Peak and GONG++ on the optical side. The full text of the Senior Review is available at the NSF astronomy website (includes some neat stuff about the science).
So what are radio astronomer planning to do instead? As mentioned in the first post there is the SKA, but the real motivation is to clear up money to finish and run ALMA which works at 100s of GHz (top near 700 GHz) and is at 17,000 feet in Chile. The cool thing about ALMA is looking at planet formation and being able to do chemistry in star forming regions, because you can see all the molecular line transitions you can figure out the amino acids etc. in these very young stellar systems (it also does a lot of other things).
There are also a number of smaller and very neat projects coming along. One I am working on is called the Mileura Widefield Array - Low Frequency Demonstrator (MWA-LFD). The MWA works down at TV and radio frequencies (80-300 MHz, FM radio is 88-106 MHz), and is in the western Australian desert to avoid earth based transmissions. We have three cool features, we can make an image of the radio sky that is 30 degrees across (a significant fraction of the visibile sky) every few seconds (transients), see the magnetic fields in coronal mass ejections from our sun (space weather), and my piece which is looking at the very first galaxies as they formed 12 billion years ago so we can understand how the galaxies and clusters formed (the latest Scientific American has a neat article by Avi Loeb about this science in the current issue).
So in short, radio astronomers want to do new things, and unfortunately that means hard decisions about what to keep and what to close. The NSF is making these hard decisions with the help of the community. And while it saddens me that this needs to be done, the NSF should be commended for doing it. This is good government and the public should be proud.
-Miguel F. Morales
Slashdot Mirror
I completely agree the NSF should get more money.
The Astronomy division at the NSF (who is really the first to do a strategic review of existing projects like this) has made the interesting argument that this process will help them get more money. The theory of change is: "In order to get more money, we have to show that we have trimmed as much as we can from the existing program. If we are running a lean, mean, science-machine, we can effectively argue for more funding."
I find this an interesting idea, we'll see if it works. -Miguel F. Morales
As a radio astrophysicist, I have to chime in to say that the Senior Review by the NSF (and the associated potential close of Arecibo) is a ballsy move and absolute the right thing to do. This is good governance. In response to the first post, the operating cost of Arecibo is $12M per year. The basic problem is that there are a number of very exciting new projects people want to build, but in an era of flat funding profiles you have to make hard decisions and close something before you can open something else. The Senior Review is made up of senior astronomers, and is how the NSF makes these decisions. The Senior Review also recommended cutting back a number of other facilities, including the Very Long Baseline Array (world's highest resolution images, but only of bright objects), and Kitt Peak, Sacramento Peak and GONG++ on the optical side. The full text of the Senior Review is available at the NSF astronomy website (includes some neat stuff about the science). So what are radio astronomer planning to do instead? As mentioned in the first post there is the SKA, but the real motivation is to clear up money to finish and run ALMA which works at 100s of GHz (top near 700 GHz) and is at 17,000 feet in Chile. The cool thing about ALMA is looking at planet formation and being able to do chemistry in star forming regions, because you can see all the molecular line transitions you can figure out the amino acids etc. in these very young stellar systems (it also does a lot of other things). There are also a number of smaller and very neat projects coming along. One I am working on is called the Mileura Widefield Array - Low Frequency Demonstrator (MWA-LFD). The MWA works down at TV and radio frequencies (80-300 MHz, FM radio is 88-106 MHz), and is in the western Australian desert to avoid earth based transmissions. We have three cool features, we can make an image of the radio sky that is 30 degrees across (a significant fraction of the visibile sky) every few seconds (transients), see the magnetic fields in coronal mass ejections from our sun (space weather), and my piece which is looking at the very first galaxies as they formed 12 billion years ago so we can understand how the galaxies and clusters formed (the latest Scientific American has a neat article by Avi Loeb about this science in the current issue). So in short, radio astronomers want to do new things, and unfortunately that means hard decisions about what to keep and what to close. The NSF is making these hard decisions with the help of the community. And while it saddens me that this needs to be done, the NSF should be commended for doing it. This is good government and the public should be proud. -Miguel F. Morales