Astromanager LLC

Our latest blog post:

Tag: Politics

  • Musings on the future of Astronomy

    The future of astronomy seems clear to me right now. It goes through ESO.

    That’s not particularly bad, especially if you’re an ESO member, but if you’re not, things may be a little less good. With the addition of Brazil, ESO has begun its expansion beyond Europe and it’s no secret that several other non-European countries are currently considering joining ESO. ESO stands to gain even more attention if one of the competing Giant Segmented Mirror Telescopes (GSMT: TMT/GMT) do not take off or appear to get the critical national support they need to attract and hold new funding partners. The world’s astronomers may have no choice – join ESO or stay out of the large telescope game.

    Now, I have nothing against doing science with “small” (< 8m) telescopes. There is a lot of attractive and compelling science to be done there. The “smaller” telescopes offer more opportunities to innovate by using new observing techniques and equipment, having access to larger amounts of telescope time, and affording the opportunities for high-risk, high-gain projects that couldn’t be assigned time at the larger telescopes. But if you want a balanced national program, you are going to want access to the world’s largest telescopes, as well.

    In the thirty meter telescope era, funding and general support for the 8-10m telescopes will decrease. No problem for ESO – it has a full house of telescope of different apertures and functions, working in conjunction to support one another and produce a well-balanced suite of capabilities for its user community. It is more of a problem, however, if you’re a single (or even dual) 8m telescope owner like Gemini, Subaru, or Keck, for example. Mauna Kea astronomy is some of the best in the world, and yet, without a GSMT for its community, and in the face of shrinking budgets as its telescope owners either divest themselves from the Mauna Kea telescopes to invest in a GSMT or ESO or simply to reduce their commitment to astronomy, Mauna Kea telescopes will decrease in relevance. ESO is great, but for the good of astronomy, we can’t let Mauna Kea, we can’t let non-ESO astronomy, fade away.

    One possible solution has been discussed for ages, but never fully endorsed or implemented. It is starting, however to reappear in several different forms for different, but related reasons. We must somehow unite the telescopes on Mauna Kea into something greater than the sum of the individual observatories.  There is a VLT right now on Mauna Kea, but we just don’t operate it as such. Actually, when you consider the unique strengths of even just the 8-10m telescope on Mauna Kea, we have a potential uber-VLT in our midst. Add community access to Gemini South and you have a facility which could conceivably span both northern and southern hemispheres – a very worthy competitor to the VLT.

    Establishing some sort of Mauna Kea Federation has several advantages: 1) it would allow each observatory to concentrate on what it does best, reducing the costs incurred in trying to provide each independent community access to the entire spectrum of wavelength and resolution coverage on the sky, 2) it would allow each facility to offer a capability in its strong suit that is currently beyond anything it can currently afford to do, 3) it would form a natural community to not only fund, but properly feed and support, a non-ESO GSMT, and 4) through shared resources, it would provide each community with better access to tools and facilities than any community currently has.

    In the inevitable funding cuts that will certainly come to the current Mauna Kea telescopes, the disparate Mauna Kea communities must join together if they are going to continue to have access to the level of infrastructure they are used to. It is unlikely that any existing Mauna Kea observatory will be able to offer the same range of wavelength and resolution in cutting edge instrumentation with the high levels of support that it currently does. Downgrade your capabilities or unite. There will be no other choice.

    So, given all this, how do we unite the current Mauna Kea telescopes? I don’t at all claim to know the detailed answer to that one, but I think the path includes the word federation. We must find a way to allow each observatory to retain its current identity and functional systems while allowing each observatory to develop capabilities that both play to its own strong suit and are attractive not only to its own community of users, but to the communities from the other telescopes as well. I don’t think this task is all that hard (the large Mauna Kea telescopes have some natural complements to each other already), but it will take a change in mindset to implement. In the meantime, I think each facility ought to be increasing its strengths and planning for a future where these strengths are traded for high-level capabilities at the other facilities. Playing to our strengths is a good strategy even in the absence of a Mauna Kea Federation. As each facility further develops its strengths, though, it will find that not only is its community enjoying the new benefits, but other communities will start looking for ways to get access themselves. By making our facilities the best at what we can each do best, we will start driving the demand for some sort of federation at both ends: our own communities will start wanting access to capabilities in short supply at our facilities and other communities will start wanting our unique capabilities to complement theirs as well. If we do this right, need and desire from both sides will help us find a way form our more perfect union.

    Realtime demand is a more effective motivator for change than is forward thinking and long term planning, however accurate and omniscient it may be.

    Scot has nothing against ESO, and actually thinks they have a great facility and approach to fulfilling their communities’ needs, but for the good of astronomy, he thinks a little friendly competition and rivalry is a good thing. He’s pretty sure the ESO community would say the same thing, if asked.

  • The role of politics in astronomy

    For some, politics is a dirty word – either a necessary evil or something to be avoided altogether. For others, it’s the name of the game. What role does politics have to play in modern astronomy?

    I suppose first of all, it might help to define what I mean by politics. One definition I read recently said politics is public action for the purpose of personal gain. Patrick Lencioni defines politics as  when people say things in order to achieve a secondary effect, not because they really mean what they say. In the Sciences, I might modify it a bit to be when people say or do things that are not based on pure scientific objectives. I’m not sure that’s the right definition, but let’s start with that for now.

    What are some examples of politics in astronomy? Well, how about underestimating the price of a new telescope or instrument because you think you can only get X dollars now for your project, when you know you’ll have to come back later for more funds?  How about starting a new project not because you think it contains the best science, but because you think you can get money for it?

    Now, I suppose it would be naive to say there is no place for politics in astronomy. We certainly have to strive and compete for funding. We have large communities we have to work with and keep happy; we need to keep their interests and culture in mind when we interact with them.  Pure scientific objectivity might have to take a back seat occasionally to keeping people working together.   Another Lencioni definition of politics (from The Five Dysfunctions of a Team) is when people choose their words and actions based on how they want others to react rather than based on what they really think. This kind of politics certainly doesn’t help team dynamics, but can be useful for building collaborations and bridging cultures (you may not always agree with a cultural norm, but while you’re building a cross-cultural relationship, your scientific objectives might be furthered more effectively if you pay some heed to them).

    The Dog and Pony Show. Ultimately, only effective at undermining a scientitst's credibility and value.

    Going with the second best vendor for a product might provide needed benefits to a collaborative partner, for example, that wouldn’t be realized via the first choice, with only a minor hit on scientific output, price or schedule.  These might be cases where scientific objectivity is sacrificed a little to achieve a larger political, or social, end.  I have misgivings about these kinds of political compromises, in general, but if not abused, there’s probably a time and place for them.  They work best, though, when the scientific loss is acknowledged and compared with the political or social gain.

    On the other hand, when we start losing our scientific grounding, things become very dangerous quickly.  Our stakeholders rely on our objectivity – that’s our value – scientific objectivity and output.  When we show a pattern of sacrificing scientific output for political gain, we lose the very core of what makes us valuable to people.  We lose our community’s trust.   And when that happens, the temptation can be again to resort to politics to quickly restore some of that lost value,  thereby deepening the hole and continuing the cycle.

    Compared to the professionals, the ones who have all the money we are often seeking, astronomers are generally extremely poor politicians. This is not a game we’re likely to win.  We’re valued for our science – that’s our unique trait and asset and should be our defining characteristic.  We sometimes need politics to play nice with our friends, to share the benefits of our efforts, to communicate our results, but when politics starts dictating our science, we lose the very essence of why we exist.

    Scot’s seen enough Dog and Pony Shows in astronomy to know that the only people being fooled are the performers themselves. He currently has no dogs nor ponies of his own. He used to have a brine shrimp, but it died.

Big Science Boards Books Budgets Business Change Management Classes Communications Community Competition Conflict Crucibles Emotions Employee Development fire-fighting Fun Gemini GTD Hiring Impostors International Introduction Leadership Management Management Corollary Matrix Mauna Kea Federation Mistakes Politics Productivity Project Management Scientist Dilemma SDSS Social Media Videos Whole Earth Telescope