:strip_exif()/u/253026/Division-Brabant-avator-got.gif?f=community)
LEES DIT EERST VOORDAT ER VAN ALLES GEROEPEN WORDT
DIT IS NOG NIET HET EIND VAN SETI@HOME
SETI@HOME ZAL DOORGAAN
DIT IS NOG NIET HET EIND VAN SETI@HOME
Met dank aan Eric Korpela die dit heeft opgesteldThe news that the Allen Telescope Array has gone into "hibernation" due to lack of funds was broken by Scientific American. We've known that this was a possibility for quite a while, but are sorry to see it happen. Since there's an implied relationship between the SETI@home and the SETI Institute, I thought I would open a Q&A thread about this closure.
Q. How does this closure affect SETI@home?
A. It really doesn't. While some of our projects (Fly's Eye experiment) have used the ATA, SETI@home doesn't use any data from ATA. We also don't currently receive any funding from the SETI Institute, and are not affected by their budget.
Q. Why has the ATA closed?
A. The ATA has gone into hibernation due to lack of funding. ATA requires about $1.5M/yr for operations and an additional $1M/yr to support the SETI Institute's science programs. $2.5M/yr sounds like a lot, but the cost of one F/A-18 jet could fully fund that for 23.5 years.
Q. What do you mean by "hibernation"?
A. Hibernation is in between operational and fully shut down. In hibernation some systems necessary to keep the telescope healthy are still powered on. In a full shutdown, critical components would be removed from the telescope and put into storage to prevent damage. That would make restarting expensive. But keeping systems powered during hibernation is also expensive. If funding is not found, at some point the decision would be made to shut down completely.
Q. Have they asked NSF/NASA/Paul Allen/Rupert Murdoch/George Soros/Richard Branson/Bill Gates/Oprah?
A. I'm sure the answer to the first two is "yes." But the NSF and NASA have spent their money on new instruments and/or telescope arrays and are getting squeezed in other areas. The billionaires? I have no way of knowing. I know that I would have no way of getting in contact with any of them.
Q. Why don't you pool your resources with the SETI Institute's in order to save the telescope?
A. We don't have that kind of money. We're also on a very tight budget and will have enough difficulty keeping SETI@home in operation with our current funding.
Q. If you personally had the money to keep it operating, would you donate it?
A. Probably not. As envisioned, the 350 telescope ATA would have been a great instrument for SETI. But as it exists now, the 42 telescope ATA is less sensitive to SETI signals than Arecibo and takes longer to survey the same amount of sky. That doesn't mean it's inappropriate for anyone's research, it just doesn't fit the bill for mine.
The expansion to 350 telescopes will take much more money than the I will ever have known anyone who knows anyone who has. It may even approach the cost of that F/A-18. I'd love to see it happen, but I'm understandably pessimistic. If I were a billionaire and had 60 million burning a hole in my pocket, then I might fund the expansion. Assuming I didn't blow it all on ninja supermodel robots first.
Q. Will this be the end of the SETI Institute?
A. Not by a long shot. Remember the start of the SETI Institute what caused by the cancellation of all federal SETI funding. If the ATA closes down, I think the SETI Institute will just concentrate on making instrumentation that they can use on other telescopes.
SETI@HOME ZAL DOORGAAN
/u/349811/gears.png?f=community)
:strip_icc():strip_exif()/u/27193/crop6530ff7f2f961_cropped.jpg?f=community)
