3 ms·

It's frustrating that isn't addressed in the article. Does Arecibo do more than other comparable telescopes? Or will science and humanity go on? Is it worth th

It's frustrating that isn't addressed in the article. Does Arecibo do more than other comparable telescopes? Or will science and humanity go on? Is it worth the billion, or $200m, or whatever, to rebuild in the name of science?

lupire 4y ago
Pretty clearly not. It's natural advantage has faded over time as tech progressed. It's value would mainly be to show that we can afford to do some luxury science and local science, and be a focal point for Puerto Rico, which isn't necessarily bad. If PR had representation in Congress, Arecibo rebuild would be an easy pork barrel project.
- Robotbeat 4y ago
  We have no other filled aperture radiotelescope of comparable area, with transmit capability. Filled aperture matters. The only comparable telescope is the Chinese FAST radiotelescope, which is somewhat larger in diameter but without all the capabilities (and, you know. Being in China.).
  - krapht 4y ago
    > Filled aperture matters. Could say the exact opposite... sparse synthetic apertures are more cost-efficient.
    - Robotbeat 4y ago
      Totally depends on what you’re trying to do. Arecibo was used in transmit mode, too, for studying asteroids, etc. and the “thinned array curse” hits you hard if you don’t have a filled array for transmission as most of your energy ends up in sidelobes, not the central beam. Plus, sparse array only works well for high contrast, high brightness sources. And it has a bunch of artifacts that can get in the way of interpretation of the data. Plus just pure filled area matters a lot.
shagie 4y ago
It can transmit and it has a larger surface area (collecting area) than other telescopes. Didymos has been in the news recently... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/65803_Didymos#/media/File:Didymos-Arecibo-radar-images.png https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/65803_Didymos#/media/File:Didy... Note the "Arecibo" in the file name. > Fourteen sequential Arecibo radar images of the near-Earth asteroid (65803) Didymos and its moonlet, taken on 23, 24 and 26 November 2003. NASA’s planetary radar capabilities enable scientists to resolve shape, concavities, and possible large boulders on the surfaces of these small worlds. Photometric lightcurve data indicated that Didymos is a binary system, and radar imagery distinctly shows the secondary body. That was done with radio pulses sent from Arecibo. Science will go on, but we've lost a tool. The area of the dish remains unmatched. https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/48666/arecibo-advantages-of-giant-dish https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/48666/arecibo-adva...
gpvos 4y ago
A similar, larger telescope[0] was put into service in China in 2016. There are a few things Arecibo could do that it can't (receiving frequencies above 3 GHz, transmitting), but in other areas it's better. So on the whole I can see how the need isn't that strong right now. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five-hundred-meter_Aperture_Spherical_Telescope https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five-hundred-meter_Aperture_Sp...

lupire 4y ago

Pretty clearly not. It's natural advantage has faded over time as tech progressed. It's value would mainly be to show that we can afford to do some luxury science and local science, and be a focal point for Puerto Rico, which isn't necessarily bad. If PR had representation in Congress, Arecibo rebuild would be an easy pork barrel project.

Robotbeat 4y ago
We have no other filled aperture radiotelescope of comparable area, with transmit capability. Filled aperture matters. The only comparable telescope is the Chinese FAST radiotelescope, which is somewhat larger in diameter but without all the capabilities (and, you know. Being in China.).
- krapht 4y ago
  > Filled aperture matters. Could say the exact opposite... sparse synthetic apertures are more cost-efficient.
  - Robotbeat 4y ago
    Totally depends on what you’re trying to do. Arecibo was used in transmit mode, too, for studying asteroids, etc. and the “thinned array curse” hits you hard if you don’t have a filled array for transmission as most of your energy ends up in sidelobes, not the central beam. Plus, sparse array only works well for high contrast, high brightness sources. And it has a bunch of artifacts that can get in the way of interpretation of the data. Plus just pure filled area matters a lot.

shagie 4y ago

It can transmit and it has a larger surface area (collecting area) than other telescopes. Didymos has been in the news recently... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/65803_Didymos#/media/File:Didymos-Arecibo-radar-images.png https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/65803_Didymos#/media/File:Didy... Note the "Arecibo" in the file name. > Fourteen sequential Arecibo radar images of the near-Earth asteroid (65803) Didymos and its moonlet, taken on 23, 24 and 26 November 2003. NASA’s planetary radar capabilities enable scientists to resolve shape, concavities, and possible large boulders on the surfaces of these small worlds. Photometric lightcurve data indicated that Didymos is a binary system, and radar imagery distinctly shows the secondary body. That was done with radio pulses sent from Arecibo. Science will go on, but we've lost a tool. The area of the dish remains unmatched. https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/48666/arecibo-advantages-of-giant-dish https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/48666/arecibo-adva...

gpvos 4y ago

A similar, larger telescope[0] was put into service in China in 2016. There are a few things Arecibo could do that it can't (receiving frequencies above 3 GHz, transmitting), but in other areas it's better. So on the whole I can see how the need isn't that strong right now. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five-hundred-meter_Aperture_Spherical_Telescope https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five-hundred-meter_Aperture_Sp...