Aloha TMT

In a long awaited announcement, America’s largest optical telescope project unveiled the chosen site for its new observatory. After a long and extensive campaign of site testing and comparison, and, more importantly perhaps, much politicking, the Thirty Meter Telescope board have reached an agreement to build their telescope on the Mauna Kea in Hawaii.

The TMT, a collaboration of US, Canadian and Japanese institutes, is one of three projects in the so-called class of extremely large telescopes, or ELTs. In the last year, two potenial sites were studied in a final run-off: the well known Hawaiian mountain Mauna Kea, and Cerro Armazones, an as yet undeveloped site in the Chilean Andes. As both sites are excellent from the astroclimatological perspective, it is rumoured that the Japanese involvement was at least partly responsible for the final choice. All three of the partner countries already have telescopes and infastructure on Mauna Kea.

With the smallest of the ELTs, the 24-m
Giant Magellan Telescope confirmed to be sited at Las Campanas, also in Chile, and ESO’s strong ties with the country, TMT will ensure that an ELT will also be watching the Northern skies. In addition seems sensible to question the sanity of locating three of the world’s most powerful telescopes in a relatively small area – and one with substantial seismic activity at that.

All eyes are now on ESO, whose 42-m ELT project, the imaginatively named European ELT, is the last in the trio to be found a home. While ESO are running an extensive testing campaign at 5 sites around the world, there is much speculation that TMT’s second-choice site, Armazones, could now be in the running for the E-ELT. An announcement from ESO is expected in the next year.

Decision time for UK ground-based astronomy

By the end of this year, UK astronomers are likely to know what ground-based observational facilities they will have access to in the next decade. Today, the Science and Technology Facilities Council or STFC, the body that administrates funds for UK astronomy and particle physics, has published a (long-rumoured) consultation document inviting the community to discuss priorities in ground-based astronomy in the next 10 years. The document was prepared by STFC’s recently formed Ground-based Facilities Review Panel, made up of 6 UK-based senior astronomers (incidentally all men). An electronic questionnaire will be available in the near future for astronomers to express their views, and “facility directors and interested groups” are invited to submit paper contributions. [Read more...]

Gender bias in peer-review: the final word?

It’s a much-quoted argument by advocates of “equal opportunities” in science that scientific papers written by female authors are consistently ranked lower in peer review than those of their male colleagues. Indeed, several studies (Bornmann et al, 2007; Budden et al., 2008; not exclusively in physics & astronomy) have appeared to indicate that women authors don’t fare as well in peer review, be it for papers, grant applications or fellowship proposals. It’s a popular topic of discussion in the “Women in Science” circles as a clear-cut, proven area where discrimination on the basis of gender takes place. [Read more...]

The Real World: Astronomers' Edition

Compared with other branches of science, you could think there’s not much at stake in real world terms in astronomy research. The amounts of money involved are relatively small**, both in terms of investment and potential gain. Also, galaxies (fortunately!) don’t take us to court if we get their redshifts wrong, and young stars don’t die horrible deaths if they don’t get their shots. Both the community itself and the public see astronomers as this beautiful global brotherhood (a few sisters even these days) working together to unlock the secrets of the Universe. Unfortunately the days where our competition is purely intellectual are long gone, and the modern way of astronomy, as with most fields in science, is a bloody fight for resources, regconition and cash. And the battle grounds are the journals that publish our work. [Read more...]

Funding people, not projects

Today I attended a talk by Prof. Cornelis van Bochove, who was appointed as Professor of Science Policy Studies at Leiden University in February last year. Van Bochove has had an interesting career: after a number of years in econometrics research, he became Director of the Dutch Central Bureau for Statistics for 5 years until 1999, after that Director of Research and Science Policy at the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science until 2007. In those years he apparently always showed a keen interest in astronomy and was a strong supporter of the Dutch astronomy community, which has a long history of international excellence. Rather than hang up his hat, van Bochove joined Leiden to go back to the bench. The focus of his research is “evidence-based science policy”. So he’s looking at the science behind funding science. A bit of a brain twister, I know. But the talk turned out to be very interesting, and a little bit surreal. [Read more...]