A postscript to my previous post -- the SETI discussion titled "Radio Astronomy: The End of Big Dishes? " is still available online at https://www.seti.org/event/seti-talks-radio-astronomy-end-big-dishes.
Another SETI event, which may even be this week or next, is a discussion of the science and the background of the Parkes (Australia) dish, including a showing of the movie "The Dish" about the Parkes' facility's role in the Apollo 11 landing. Ted, KN1CBR Edward A. Dauer [email protected] -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, December 2, 2020 2:15 PM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: Elecraft Digest, Vol 200, Issue 3 Just before the cable failures a few weeks ago SETI did a webinar on the very subject. What I took away from it was that the future of radio astronomy lies in VLBI arrays rather than wide-diameter dishes, and that for economic as well as electronic reasons the direction is toward more numerous much smaller antennas and lots of enhancements in data processing. In response to a question I put during the Q&A, the presenters' answer was yes, that direction in radio astronomy's evolution will increase the potential for amateurs to contribute to the kind of research large dishes have been doing. I too regret the catastrophe at Arecibo. In fact, I took the occasion to rewatch "Contact," in which Ellie Arroway as a young girl, signing W9GFO and frustrated at her inability to reach her father on (I assume HF) SSB said wistfully, "I need a bigger antenna." The next scene was the more mature Ellie standing at the edge of Arecibo. But despite the loss of a legendary facility, if what I heard at the SETI event was correct, there will not likely be any serious effort to rebuild it. Ted, KN1CBR ________________________________ From: [email protected] <[email protected]> on behalf of Grant Youngman <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, December 2, 2020 11:47 AM To: Elecraft Refl <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Arecibo antenna collapses I suppose the question is why not rebuild it if the capability (or an upgraded capability) remains of consequential value to the scientific community and there is no existing capability that can be cobbled together elsewhere to match it. I don?t know what it would cost, but consider that one Virginia-class submarine costs well over $3B. We build those, even if it is in small numbers. It?s a matter of priorities ? and pretty small $$ in the big picture. Grant NQ5T > ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[email protected] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [email protected]
