http://www.ifa.hawaii.edu/info/press-releases/PS1_consortium/
The cosmologists should be given their $10 million back - it comes from the taxpayer anyway, and I deeply resent their attempted private control over NEO search fundiing in any way. I suspect the taxpayers' astronomical observing priorities are different than those of the cosmologists.
The NEO researchers need time on large scopes for spectral studies and for the accurate tracking of individual small pieces, and the only way the cosmologists should be getting access to PanStarrs is in trade for that observing time. Let's see how the much time the cosmologists are willing to give up on these large telescopes, including the radio telescopes time for radar studies. I'll bet they squeal like piglets run off from the teat.
I suggest several congressional fact finding commissions, with members visiting PanStarrs in Hawaii as soon as possible, say between November-March, at their convenience. The 64 fragments of SW3 are on their way, swinging near the Earth in 2022, and 2004 MN4 comes by in 2029.
As far as those here who try to rationalize a lack of need for CAPS, note that this best ground based system has a maximum assured limit of 300 meters, when 75 meters or maybe 50 meters is needed, depending on scaling laws. Note also that PanStarrs data processing will be done in a nearby city, use extremely large amounts of power, and require large bandwidth data transmission lines. You can't get any of those things in free space.
You can't reliably find 75 meter objects as dark as soft coal from free space using reflected light. It's time to return to the Moon and build CAPS. Or we can wait until 2023, and depend on China to warn us.
E.P.
"Man and Impact in the Americas"
Space/Science » in reply to The TMT (30 meter telescope) will be built first...
It will take a hammer to pry the grasping fingers of the cosmologists off of the telescope budgets
The whole thread (23 posts)
- I love Hubble, but $900 Million???
- re: I love Hubble, but $900 Million???
- Imagine if all the military money spent in Iraq were spent on telescopes instead (n/t)
- Advances in ground based optics
- probably it wouldn't cost much more to build one from scratch... (n/t)
- $900 million would go a long way in paying for Hubble II
- The Hubble team overhead is $125 million a year?
- Oh, man! You want to cut and run? (n/t)
- re:What matters
- Don't worry about it. NASA is flush with Cash.
