Hawaiians protest against telescope, want land back

[Cyril Haearn]

The Grauniad reports from Hawaii that indigenous people are protesting against a huge building project on the high€$t mountain
Plus One! They have the advantage of being far from the lower forty-eight too, Hawaii is Different and 'Isolated', maybe real change is possible, Barack Obama lived on Hawaii, perhaps he could get involved

May one travel there by ship?

[Syd]

Ship UK to USA, train across USA, try and get a ride on one of the many freight ships that head out to Hawaii?

Getting to the correct island may be the toughest bit. I was out in Hawaii a number of years ago and fancied visiting another of the big islands. Seemed most people fly and it’s a hard life for the fleet of 747 planes running short inter island flights.

[Mike Sales]

May one travel there by ship?

There is a yacht race from California to Hawaii. In characteristic US manner they call it the Transpacific or Transpac. One could hitch a ride, like Greta.

[Cyril Haearn]

Thor Heyerdal had a good way to get across the Pacific, at the end he looked like Mike or me

[pwa]

Hawaii is famous for astronomy. But I empathise with people who don't want much loved peaks sullied by construction projects.

[Cyril Haearn]

Hawaii is famous for astronomy. But I empathise with people who don't want much loved peaks sullied by construction projects.

Indeed, just think of the Highest Slum in Wales

[pwa]

Hawaii is famous for astronomy. But I empathise with people who don't want much loved peaks sullied by construction projects.

Indeed, just think of the Highest Slum in Wales

Where's that? Penrhys? It isn't as bad up there these days. Or do you mean the cafe / station on top of Snowdon? Most folk don't mind that because they want the tea and cake.

[661-Pete]

This issue was first reported several weeks ago, but you may have missed it. Anyway, today's article is here.

Yes. For me - with my (somewhat lessened of late) passion for astronomy, I'm in two minds, but I'm more inclined to respect the wishes of the indigenous Hawaiians.

How many huge telescopes does the Earth need? On our recent South America tour (yes, we flew there ) we visited the VLT (Very Large Telescope array) at Cerro Paranal in Chile. This is the second largest (in combined aperture) telescope in the world (after existing telescopes on Mauna Kea). Each of the four telescopes, which can work together interferometrically, has a primary mirror 8.2m across. Mind-boggling.

And a few miles away from Cerro Paranal, on Cerro Amazonas, they're constructing what will be the world's largest telescope, the ELT which will have a 39 metre primary mirror. Even more mind-boggling! To put it in perspective, this telescope when completed (scheduled 2025) should have 16 times the resolution, and 250 times the light-gathering power, of the Hubble Space Telescope.

So I have to ask - do we need the Thirty Metre Telescope? Its main advantage will be slightly better 'seeing' than the Atacama, and being in the Northern Hemisphere. The Chilean telescopes are at latitude 25°S and hence cannot see everything visible from the Northern Hemisphere. For that reason the Thirty Metre would nicely complement them.

But I still think the wishes of the Hawaiians should be respected. That's my 2p worth.

[kwackers]

But I still think the wishes of the Hawaiians should be respected. That's my 2p worth.

And most astronomers seem to agree. According to a report in NS most support the telescope being built elsewhere.

I'm good with a 30m telescope though. Nice to see money being spent on science - the poor cousin of war.

[Mick F]

Why don't they put a big remotely controlled telescope on the moon?
They have a Hubble up in space, so why not a moon one?

[661-Pete]

A better prospect will, hopefully, be the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST), the successor to the Hubble, with a 6.5 metre mirror. If it actually gets off the ground! It is planned to position it at or near the second Lagrange point (L2) with respect to the Earth's orbit, about 1.5 million Km from the Earth (nearly 4 times as far as the Moon). At this point it could, in theory, orbit the Sun in lock-step with the Earth's orbit, i.e. in exactly one year - so that it always remains in the Earth's shadow and 'sees' a permanent total eclipse.

At least that's the theory: but the L2 point is not stable, so the JWST would need to burn propellant just to stay in the right position. I believe NASA are planning a slightly different orbit.

Telescope on the moon? Often mooted, but at the moment (haven't you noticed?) there aren't actually any people on the Moon - and despite a certain yellow-haired individual's prognostications, I don't believe another human Moon mission is going to happen any time soon. It would be a good idea to locate it on the far side, so that it doesn't pick up any unwelcome radiations from Planet Earth. But that adds to the complication - and no human has ever visited the far side.

Still wishful thinking. I guess we should be satisfied with what we've got...

[Mick F]

Why do you need people on the moon?
If we can land a Mars rover thingy to explore the planet, why can't we land a telescope on the moon, or pieces of them, and a machine to assemble them into one useable unit?

[Cyril Haearn]

Chomolungma (Everest) is the obvious place, it has already been ruined by far too many visitors, access is probably relatively easy

I think Hawaii could be The Better America