a new multi-telescope interferometer composed of ten

January 20, 2007 (SAN JOSE, Calif.) – SCHOTT announced
today that the Magdalena Ridge Observatory (MRO) in New
Mexico, a new multi-telescope interferometer composed of ten
1.4 meter telescopes, will use SCHOTT ZERODUR® glass
ceramic for the interferometer’s primary, secondary and tertiary
mirrors.

By synthesizing the ten telescopes light-gathering into a single
image, the MRO interferometer will simulate a single telescope of
400 meters. Scheduled for completion in 2008, the MRO will have
the fourth-highest elevation for an observatory in the world.
ZERODUR glass ceramic’s low expansion qualities make it wellsuited
for use in astronomical telescopes such as the MRO. The
three largest telescopes in the world use mirrors made of
ZERODUR glass-ceramic.


http://www.google.com/url?sa=U&star...al.pdf&usg=AFQjCNGaP8rhjExtruTxjoOAMnCpyLfebg

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Excellent. Is this a better, less expensive way to go compared to the proposed 30-meter telescope?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

What was the cost of that telescope, if you remember? This is at least 3 times the clarity of Hubble. The MRO interferometer will simulate a single telescope of 400 meters.

Domenici is also seeking support for his $30 million request for the Magdalena Ridge Observatory (MRO) project under the Office of Naval Research, Naval Research Laboratory

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

We've been having hearings on it in Hilo. As I recall, the total cost is roughly $1 Billion.

 

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

That seems way out of what it should be worth.

 

1) Since the MROI is being built in New Mexico, who in Hilo is holding hearings on it and why? Cambridge, maybe, but Hilo?
2) $45-$50 million is a quoted figure, which may be for the entire complex. Where do your numbers come from? A different project, the Kilometric Optical Inferometer would cost close to $1 billion, but the scale of that project is much larger.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/air_space/4288168.html
http://infohost.nmt.edu/mainpage/news/2004/27july01.html
http://www.fedspending.org/faads/fa...roject_description=&detail=-1&datype=T&email=

 

I'm sure I've read somewhere that the Large Hadron Collider had cost something like 3 billion. And hubble's costs have been estimated at 6billion So the one billion numbre is big but... Well it's interesting and visualy more impresive

 

LHC ran between $5 and $12 billion depending on who did the accounting, I think.

But a good planetarium projector or a good 2-meter telescope runs in the $3 million dollar range.

 

Why don't they just make a shadow box like in school? That'd be, well, free!

 

It's cost estimate last June was $780 million. Google on "Thirty Meter Telescope Cost". They also have a web page at www.tmt.org It's supposed to beat Hubble's resolution by a factor of 12.

Keck wanted to do 'outrigger' telescopes in addition to its two 10-meter hexagonal mirror arrays. This was not approved, and they've withdrawn the proposal.

Hilo holds hearings because the headquarters would be located in Hilo, and control of the Mauna Kea site is in Hilo, the county seat where Mauna Kea is located. There is a lot of 'big science' on Hawaii island, and not just telescopes.

 

soooo wtf is a radio-telescope for, then? and what's with the laser beam in HI?

 

The Magdalena Ridge Observatory will be better than that and cost a hell of allot less. The ESO only cost about 50 million when they built it and that was 4 telescopes.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Southern_Observatory

 

Cosmictraveler:

Yeah, that's what I gathered from your post. There are people who oppose the TMT on aesthetic grounds ["desecrates the sacred Mauna Kea"]. They would love to have that ammunition.

Perhaps we need to be constructing more of the Magdalena Ridge types, to get the increased scope time, rather than wasting all that money on a TMT, or even another space telescope. Go tell that to Moore [of Intel fame], who's donated Big Bucks towards the TMT project.

Another nice thing about a ground based is -- duh -- you don't have to go into space to service it! Of course, nothing beats having a nearly pure vacuum between what you're observing and you, compared to all that air on ground-based. And, space-based does give us an impetus to go to the moon again, to Mars, etc.

I believe we'll be hearing more about this. The people at Magdalena Ridge should be able to promote their project as a huge cost-savings compared to the TMT. You might want to send them an email, and direct them to this thread.

Again, thanks for the info.

Walter

 

To put a billion dollars in perspective, it's the cost to America of less than four days of the illegal war in Iraq. The LHC was ten billion dollars and it is debatable whether it even could find anything to justify that expenditure.