IAU: The singular future of astronomy

The Hubble Deep Field

The Hubble Deep Field

For many centuries, astronomy has been a powerful inspirational force driving people to look further, build bigger, go deeper. Indeed, other physical sciences, mathematics and engineering have benefited greatly, and continue to benefit, from astronomical research. At the IAU general assembly I heard many speakers comment on the “Golden Age” of astronomy we currently finding ourselves in. But as one speaker argued, when was astronomy not in a Golden Age? An entire 4-day session at the GA was devoted to the topic “Accelerating the rate of astronomical discovery”, which had some fascinating talks about the way astronomical discoveries are made and how technological changes underpin progress in astronomy.

An important theme running through many talks in the session was the power of the individual in astronomy. The balance between the individual and the crowd has always been a delicate one. Many early scientists faced disbelief or even wrath from peers and society for their discoveries, from Copernicus‘ “heretic” claims of a heliocentric universe to the initial rejection of Saha‘s equation of ionisation equilibrium by the 1920′s scientific establishment. Several talks were love stories to the mavericks whose doggedness, eccentricity and creativity changed the face of astronomy, culminating in Dame Jocelyn Bell-Burnell‘s wonderful own account of her discovery of the first pulsars in the 1960s.

[Read more...]

Stellar Citizen Science

Historical eclipse measurements of epsilon Aurigae

Historical eclipse measurements of epsilon Aurigae

Over at Professor Astronomy, Kurtis recently talked about an excellent citizen science project to light on the nature of mysterious variable star epsilon Aurigae. For almost 200 years, this run-of-the-mill star has been seen to dim periodically. This is not particularly remarkable in se – many stars dim at regular intervals, typically every few days, due to a companion star or planet passing in front of it. But in the case of epsilon Aurigae, the dip in its lightcurve occurs every 27 years and lasts several hundred days – around 2 years! The eclipse lightcurve (above) also shows that the dip contains quite a few bumps. So whatever movement is causing the eclipse is very very slow, and some interaction between the two bodies appears to be going on.  [Read more...]

It’s all happening at the ‘Zoo

Someone told me
It’s all happening at the Zoo.

[Read more...]

TED Prize: Searching for life in the Universe

One of the winners of the annual TED prize, announced at the organisation’s annual conference in Long Beach last week, is astronomer Dr. Jill Tarter, Director of the SETI Institute in California. TED, which stands for Technology, Entertainment, Design, is a kind of super-club of creative minds from those fields set up in 1984 who meet a few times  year to discuss Big Ideas.

There’s a lot of lofty rhetoric involved and they could easily be accused of being a kind of elitist international country club for geeks. But I think there’s more to it: talks from the TED conference are made freely available at their website for everyone to watch and there is some genuinely good stuff there: originality,creativity, and an awareness of and concern for global issues. TED talks have been viewed online more than 100 million times and translated into 25 languages. Many of TED’s ‘Brain Trustees’ have impressive track records in turning innovative ideas into success -Larry Page and Sergey Brin, Craig Venter, Steven Pinker and Richard Dawkins are just a few of the names on their list.

The TED prizes are awarded annually to three of these creative minds, who get a $100,000 cheque and $1 million in support funding, as well as opportunity to tap the networks and resources of the powerful TED community, to help realise “One Wish to Change the World”. Dr. Tarter’s wish for changing our world is to “ empower Earthlings everywhere to become active participants in the ultimate search for cosmic company.”

[Read more...]

Big Science

In the New York Times this week, biologist Aaron Hirsh wrote  a very interesting column on the idea of Big Science. He argues that the most successful scientists of the 21st century so far are administrators – those who are good at herding people and resources. He pinpoints a shift in the way science is actually being done:

Across many different fields, new data are generated by a smaller and smaller number of bigger and bigger projects. And with this process of centralization come changes in what scientists measure — and even in what scientists are.

This idea of centralisation is of course not new. Particularly in experimental particle physics, large collider projects such as CERN have long been the norm, and papers written by one or just a few authors are virtually unheard of. While in some fields the increasing centralisation is unavoidable and essential for continuing progress, this way of working has drawbacks.

[Read more...]