If we build it, who will come? Radio astronomy and the limitations of national laboratories in Cold War America

David P. D. Munns
{"title":"If we build it, who will come? Radio astronomy and the limitations of national laboratories in Cold War America","authors":"David P. D. Munns","doi":"10.1525/HSPS.2003.34.1.95","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT: The history of big science, especially physics, informs historians that the instrument is at the heart of Cold War science. This article presents the National Radio Astronomy Observatory (NRAO), which was consciously modeled on the Brookhaven National Laboratory and where the choice of instrument was of only secondary importance. During the planning for the NRAO, which took place from 1954 until 1956, mostly in offices in Washington, D.C. and New York, an extended debate emerged over the place of ““national”” facilities in science, and their relationship to established university programs, particularly those concerned with graduate student instruction. The case of the NRAO reveals the resilience of notions of dispersed scientific community, emphasizing smaller programs in many universities, as well as the perceived necessity of continued participation from a wide disciplinary array of practitioners who, cooperatively, forged radio astronomy. This essay illustrates substantial resistance to the model of scientific practice advocated by the national laboratories when applied to radio astronomy. Critics of a national facility for radio astronomy charged that the substantial funds could be better utilized within existing university-based programs, which would need to be expanded in any event to provide the researchers for the national facility. The senior researchers in radio astronomy were not American, highlighting the fallacy of the notion of national science.","PeriodicalId":81438,"journal":{"name":"Historical studies in the physical and biological sciences : HSPS","volume":"34 1","pages":"95-113"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2003-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1525/HSPS.2003.34.1.95","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Historical studies in the physical and biological sciences : HSPS","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1525/HSPS.2003.34.1.95","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

ABSTRACT: The history of big science, especially physics, informs historians that the instrument is at the heart of Cold War science. This article presents the National Radio Astronomy Observatory (NRAO), which was consciously modeled on the Brookhaven National Laboratory and where the choice of instrument was of only secondary importance. During the planning for the NRAO, which took place from 1954 until 1956, mostly in offices in Washington, D.C. and New York, an extended debate emerged over the place of ““national”” facilities in science, and their relationship to established university programs, particularly those concerned with graduate student instruction. The case of the NRAO reveals the resilience of notions of dispersed scientific community, emphasizing smaller programs in many universities, as well as the perceived necessity of continued participation from a wide disciplinary array of practitioners who, cooperatively, forged radio astronomy. This essay illustrates substantial resistance to the model of scientific practice advocated by the national laboratories when applied to radio astronomy. Critics of a national facility for radio astronomy charged that the substantial funds could be better utilized within existing university-based programs, which would need to be expanded in any event to provide the researchers for the national facility. The senior researchers in radio astronomy were not American, highlighting the fallacy of the notion of national science.
如果我们建了它,谁会来?射电天文学和冷战时期美国国家实验室的局限性
摘要:大科学尤其是物理学的发展史告诉历史学家,仪器是冷战科学的核心。这篇文章介绍了国家射电天文台(NRAO),它有意识地以布鲁克海文国家实验室为模型,在那里,仪器的选择只是次要的。在1954年至1956年期间,NRAO主要在华盛顿特区和纽约的办公室进行规划,期间出现了一场关于“国家”设施在科学中的地位,以及它们与既定大学项目,特别是与研究生教育有关的大学项目的关系的广泛辩论。NRAO的案例揭示了分散的科学共同体概念的弹性,强调了许多大学的小型项目,以及广泛的学科实践者的持续参与的必要性,他们合作,建立了射电天文学。这篇文章说明了对国家实验室在应用于射电天文学时所提倡的科学实践模式的实质性抵制。对建立国家射电天文学设施持批评意见的人指责说,这笔巨额资金可以更好地用于现有的以大学为基础的项目中,这些项目无论如何都需要扩大,以便为国家设施提供研究人员。射电天文学的高级研究人员不是美国人,这凸显了国家科学概念的谬误。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信