Live data from Hacker News

Arecibo Observatory Collapsed

space.com

31–40 of 337 posts

Re: Arecibo Observatory Collapsed

#31
post #23

Is this picture real? I don't get why there isn't any evidence of bits of cables still hanging from at least one of the towers or any other kind of wreckage. It looks more like someone has photoshopped all the cables out of of an old photo.

You can see that the top of each tower has come off, so none of them are standing as tall as they were. Still, sure, it looks like a serene picture apart from the dust in the air.

Comparison before/after pic https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EoJsJl0XUAI3XfT?format=jpg&name=...

Re: Arecibo Observatory Collapsed

#32
post #12

RIP, buddy. I almost feel like I should be seeing a black banner on HN today.

That's an interesting idea ... and perhaps those of us who are skeptics and critical thinkers by nature should adopt arm-bands to indicate our support of science. These might also be useful to show opposition to climate-change deniers, anti-vaxers and flat-earthers (I'll stop there ... almost went political).

Re: Arecibo Observatory Collapsed

#33
post #23

Is this picture real? I don't get why there isn't any evidence of bits of cables still hanging from at least one of the towers or any other kind of wreckage. It looks more like someone has photoshopped all the cables out of of an old photo.

[deleted]

Re: Arecibo Observatory Collapsed

#35
post #4

I've heard that radio astronomy was greatly supported by the military because it can be used to monitor for incoming ICBMs. I guess if Arecibo were still used for such purposes, they wouldn't have let it fall into disrepair. How is such monitoring conducted in this day and age?

The anecdote I heard was that it was because there was no good way of getting data on the USSR over-the-horizon radars - other than the times where their signals would reflect off the Moon and could be analyzed by the US, given good enough antennas.

Re: Arecibo Observatory Collapsed

#37
post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It went thru the journalist filter a million times until unrecognizable. The first answer is ICBMs are, now a days, mostly an IR optical thing. The flightpath of most Russia to US ICBMs would never have passed over the observatory, obviously, but it was a major radar technology research site in the early years.

>The first answer is ICBMs are, now a days, mostly an IR optical thing. Source? This seems unlikely since ground-based visual tracking would be obscured by e.g. clouds. Is ICBM tracking all space-based and visual? (I can see why IR is useful to detect the initial boost, but it would also seem rather useless to track a small, passive object in freefall).

DSP and more recently SBIRS are satellite-based systems, both use IR. If you track the missile to the end of it's burn you'll have a pretty good idea of where it's going after that -- ballistic trajectories are fairly predictable.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defense_Support_Program

https://www.lockheedmartin.com/content/dam/lockheed-martin/s...

Re: Arecibo Observatory Collapsed

#38
post #16

"Too big to fail" apparently doesn't apply for science projects. To put this in perspective, at the cost of a single F-35A, Arecibo could be running for ~7y with funding at 2011 levels.

The problem (partly) is that the F-35 program puts money into 307 congressional districts in 45 states [1]. These insanely expensive defense projects are wealth transfer programs that make contractors like Lockheed and their many sub-contractors rich, and also create jobs in these communities.

That a fighter plane may or may not come out the other end is only nominally important, the key is to spend the money. The more money spent, the more people get work. That keeps people elected.

Arecibo had 120 FTE employees, mostly in Puerto Rico. Politically speaking that makes it inconsequential.

If you want different outcomes, then the political incentives need to be fundamentally re-aligned.

[1] https://harpers.org/archive/2019/06/the-pentagon-syndrome/

Re: Arecibo Observatory Collapsed

#39
So planetary defense relies solely on a few 1m telescopes. Interesting. Maybe the "Dish" (Australia) also. The two remaining big ones, the chinese and the russian cannot do that.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asteroid_impact_avoidance

The remaining bigs:

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five-hundred-meter_Aperture_Sp...

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RATAN-600

Re: Arecibo Observatory Collapsed

#40
post #38
post #16

"Too big to fail" apparently doesn't apply for science projects. To put this in perspective, at the cost of a single F-35A, Arecibo could be running for ~7y with funding at 2011 levels.

The problem (partly) is that the F-35 program puts money into 307 congressional districts in 45 states [1]. These insanely expensive defense projects are wealth transfer programs that make contractors like Lockheed and their many sub-contractors rich, and also create jobs in these communities. That a fighter plane may or may not come out the other end is only nominally important, the key is to spend the money. The mo…

The FTE employee-count alone underestimates the impact of national-scale science infrastructure. naic.edu is down right now (I suspect they're busy at the moment), but their data is used by tens to hundreds of institutions, each partially employing faculty, postdocs, and students.

For agencies like NSF, the science is sometimes almost secondary. What matters perhaps the most is that qualified and capable students continue to emerge from, and sustain, America's scientific institutions.

Arecibo has been fighting for its fiscal life since I was an undergraduate in the early 2000s. I couldn't understand then why anyone would want to cut funding to it, as the facility is unique and capable. As a more-mature scientist, I now understand that older instruments sometimes must sadly make way for new endeavors.

This collapse is a powerful moment for US radio astronomy. Will the community redirect the funds to promising new instruments, buck up and rebuild an upgraded Arecibo, or use the fleeting prominence of the moment find a way to grow the funding pie and do both?

It is embarrassing for the planet's leading scientific nation to have China's larger modern copy of Arecibo (FAST) come on-line in 2016 and our venerable telescope collapse without replacement in 2020. We owe it to ourselves to do better than this.

Post reply on HN