UK commits to the E-ELT

Nothing to see yet! The proposed site for the E-LT, Cerro Armazones. (image: ESO/S. Brunier)

Nothing to see yet! The proposed site for the E-LT, Cerro Armazones. (image: ESO/S. Brunier)

A nice boost for UK astronomy today as the government has placed some serious money behind the country’s involvement in the European Extremely Large Telescope. Supporting the project to the tune of £88 million over 10 years, on top of the annual subscription to ESO, the government hopes to secure a prominent role for UK science and industry in this mega-project. £88 million may seem like a modest amount of money when spread over 10 years, especially when quantified in bankers’ bonuses, but for astronomy it’s a large sum of money that will really drive research and development in both science and technology for the new observatory. Great news.

There’s been a steady trickle of press releases in the news in the last year or two, from ESO or from member countries giving their yes votes to the project. It’s good to see so much support. But the cash isn’t all there yet, as ESO still await the final word on Brazil’s accession.

I’ve spent several years working on technology relevant for the E-ELT and on a design study for one of its instruments, so this telescope lies fairly close to my heart. I’ve stepped away from it somewhat in my time in Heidelberg to focus on other projects, such as the GRAVITY instrument for the VLT Interferometer, but if I continue in my current line of work I will in all likelihood return to E-ELT instrumentation in the next few years. With a planned completion date of mid- to late-2020s, it may well dominate my working life for the next decade and a half. It’s quite amazing to be thinking and planning so far ahead – such is the nature of Big Science!

And who knows, maybe we’ll finally have those jetpacks by then.

Siding Spring Observatory under fire

For once that headline is not about some astro-political hullabaloo, as today Siding Spring Observatory, Australia’s largest optical observatory, lay in the path of a fearsome bushfire. Australian bushfires bring back bad memories for Australian astronomers, as exactly 10 years ago this week another one of their observatories, at Mt Stromlo, was severely damaged in a similar fire. So it’s been an anxious day for the Australian community, and for all of us worldwide who were stuck helplessly reading blogs and tweets from those in the country.

Fortunately, it seems like all the staff were safely evacuated and the telescopes are ok – though, as I understand it, damage assessment is still under way.

Amanda Bauer (astropixie to most of you) has an excellent and extensive set of updates, links and pictures, and her blog post has gathered a large number of comments from astronomers and locals.

Stay safe, Ozzies!

The Academic Pyramid

The leaves here in Heidelberg have turned and fallen, which can mean only one thing: we’re all writing job proposals again. If you’re a postdoc with lofty ambitions for holding a permanent job one day (one day!), you’re never really off the market. A good resource if you need inspiration in your hunt is Astrobetter, which has a page on the wiki with some helpful links. Astrobetter is of course also home to the Astrophysics Jobs Rumour Mill – the site we all love to hate.

Some time ago in October, Physics World published an article about postdoc careers, and academic careers in general, entitled “The academic pyramid”. It’s written by Margaret Harris and I was one of the interviewees – the others are fellow astros Alan Duffy in Australia and Barnaby Rowe at UCL, and Aime McNamara, a medical physics postdoc. There’s a link to the article from this blog post, you have to register but access is free. I meant to write about it earlier but didn’t get round to it; the links on Astrobetter reminded me.

The questions Harris asked me were interesting so I spent quite some time working on my responses. It was a really good opportunity to give it all some thought. On paper being a postdoc really rocks! I go to work more or less when I want, wearing what I want, some days I work from home, other days send me to Chile, or California, or Rio de Janeiro. I get paid a decent wage and have two excellent computers. I meet Nobel prize winners and people who write books for a living. Smart people ask for my opinion. What’s not to love, exactly?

The underbelly of the academic job that the travel and the prestige and the apparent laid-backness of it all manage to conceal, is the continuous, relentless pressure to Perform and Be Brilliant on so many levels. You have to be enthusiastic, write papers, go to conferences, read the literature, apply for funding, apply for jobs, network, do some teaching, do some outreach. All of those things, all the time, with confidence and a smile. It’s like a decathlon for the brain.

As an academic, particularly in a small field like astronomy, you will have to make difficult decisions in your career, and possibly sacrifice other things that matter to you in life. You will almost certainly be on fixed-term contracts throughout your mid-twenties to early-/mid-thirties, so you need to be comfortable with having a limited horizon and a degree of uncertainty in your life for that time.

But if you’re passionate about your topic and you can mentally and physically cope with the demands of the job, not to mention the occasional exotic jaunt, a research career is fantastic and you shouldn’t let any of the negativity put you off. Just work hard, live it and love it.

 

Split sites for the Square Kilometer Array

Artist's impression of some SKA dishes (SKA Organisation/TDP/DRAO/Swinburne Astronomy Productions)

The Square Kilometer Array (SKA) is the next-generation mega-facility for radio astronomers, and for a few years now the decision on where to build the observatory was a tight race between Southern Africa and Australia/New Zealand. Roughly speaking, South Africa had the development angle, Australia the long and successful history in radio astronomy, and scientifically both were excellent candidates.

Yesterday at last the SKA Members announced their heavily anticipated decision: SKA will be built across both continents, integrating the facilities both South Africa and Australia are constructing as pathfinder projects – respectively MeerKAT and ASKAP. The official announcement is here, Jonathan Amos wrote this on BBC, David Smith and Ian Sample for the Guardian here and here.

The dual site solution to me always seemed like a difficult proposition: an observatory spread over such an area seems like a managerial nightmare, and I imagine the infrastructure costs will be increased as roads and buildings will be required both in Australia and Africa. But as I’m no radio expert I don’t know what the scientific implications really are. For that, I will defer to Peter Coles and  Andy Lawrence. Andy argues convincingly that it’s actually a pretty good decision for SKA science. Some good comments on Andy’s blog too.

Overall, people seem pretty happy with the solution – a job well done for SKA.

Girls and Women in German Astronomy

Today is Girls Day in Germany, where young girls can take part in events all over Germany to learn more about jobs in science, IT and technical professions. We have a whole host of things happening here on the MPIA campus, although somehow I am missing out on the part where we make cryogenic ice cream. Darn.

What I will not be telling teenage girls about is the paper published by Heidelberg (dot-)astronomer Janine Fohlmeister and Christiane Helling of St Andrews in Astronomische Nachrichten, and posted to astro-ph today (timing: coincidence?), on the career situation of female astronomers in Germany. The results presented are based on a survey taken by 61 female astronomers, based in Germany or German but based abroad. It’s a typically bleak read: no female Max Planck directors in Astronomy, leaky pipelines etc. I have a few issues with the survey, mostly that (i) the sample is really very small, and (ii) we can only really assess how work-life issues affect women specifically if we ask men the same questions. And the authors do also state that as a limitation.

They present lists of recommendations, which are also very sensible:

a motivating, encouraging, acknowledging boss/super- visor who was a good mentor and trusted in abilities, and who helped getting hands on excellent data and who introduced into networks
finding projects as well as self-motivation and working
independently
having role models for different topics and life phases
attending and giving talks at conferences, colloquia and
seminars
successful applications for grants, observing time and
soft money
stays abroad and flexibility, and
colleagues who helped to advance.

although I’d argue these apply to both male and female PhD students alike. As a woman, you really need all the above, and a supervisor who respects you irrespective of gender and who will stick up for you when others don’t.

More salient are the anecdotes offered by women taking the survey of comments they’ve had directed at them by men. These made me laugh, but of course it’s really quite depressing.

1. General designation (unconscious or conscious prejudice):
1.1. I know you would like to work, but if all women would stay at home, we would have much less un- employment.
1.2. For a woman your seminar was good.
1.3. You must be the secretary.
1.4. Female scientists are more masculine than normal women.
1.5. Special programs for women discriminate men.
1.6. Good morning gentlemen.
1.7. Dear Sir.
1.8. Ha ha, that is the alibi/quota woman!

2. Women are not treated independently of their partner:
2.1.    The husband of this (female) applicant has a better position, so she does not need a job.
2.2.    Why you want more money? Your husband is working!
2.3.  Will you stop your PhD education now that you married?

3. Pressing into the mother-role:
3.1. You have a diploma [i.e., M.Sc. degree], why do you also want a PhD? Now you can go home and have children.
3.2. Women who give birth dont come back.
3.3. To a woman with children: The permanent position is for mister XY, he has to support his family.
3.4. She wouldn’t come anyway (for a job) due to the children.
3.5. It is better for the children if the mother stays at home.

If I had taken the survey (sorry!) I might have contributed a few classics from my own experience over the years. Sometimes these comments are meant the way they sound: nasty and prejudiced, but often they are said in good spirits or as a joke, and answering back creates more awkwardness than it’s worth. I just smile, mentally relive some noted scenes from Kill Bill, and toast my glass of wine to the morons of the world with friends later on.

But basically people: if there’s only one woman in the room, anything you say that singles her out as being different is a no-no. When in doubt, replace “woman” with “old guy”, “non-white person” or “disabled person” and if that feels wrong, just don’t go there.