The Interdisciplinary Evolution of the Hubble Space Telescope .


70 views
Uploaded on:
Category: Home / Real Estate
Description
The Interdisciplinary Advancement of the Hubble Space Telescope. A Chronicled Examination of Key Interdisciplinary Associations . Greg Carras, Jerry Cordaro, Andrew Daga, Sean Decker, Jack Kennedy, Susan Raizer College of North Dakota, Bureau of Space Studies 24 April 2006.
Transcripts
Slide 1

The Interdisciplinary Evolution of the Hubble Space Telescope A Historical Examination of Key Interdisciplinary Interactions Greg Carras, Jerry Cordaro, Andrew Daga, Sean Decker, Jack Kennedy, Susan Raizer University of North Dakota, Department of Space Studies 24 April 2006

Slide 2

The Hubble Space Telescope: An Overview A circling telescope that gathers light from heavenly protests in obvious, bright, and close infrared wavelengths Launched 24 April 1990 on board the Space Shuttle Discovery Dimensions: Cylindrical 24,500 lb (11,110-kg), 43 ft long (13.1 m ) and 14.1 ft (4.3m) wide Orbital period: 96 minutes Primarily fueled by the daylight gathered by its two sun oriented clusters The telescope\'s essential mirror is 2.4 m (8 ft) in measurement Was made by NASA with significant and proceeding with cooperation by ESA Operated by the Space Telescope Science Institute (STSI) in Baltimore, MD Named for Edwin Powell Hubble "The Hubble Space Telescope is the most beneficial telescope since Galileo\'s" - Robert Kirshner, President of the American Astronomical Society Reference: Image and information: STSI (www.hubblesite.org)

Slide 3

The development of HST might be best drawn nearer by understanding the association of four elements: The Historical Context (and the post WWII slant toward "Huge Science") The Social and Political Conditions The Technological Dimension The Participants (People and Agencies)

Slide 4

Hubble\'s Historical Context At the start of the twentieth Century, researchers had an astoundingly restricted perspective of the physical universe – many trusted that our world was the main cosmic system. Before WWII most space science was directed by people or little gatherings, and cosmic observatories were subsidized by private altruists (case: Carnegie) or by an individual stargazer (illustration: Percival Lowell). By the 1920\'s this view was in effect quickly reconsidered, partially because of the perceptions of Edwin Hubble and Milton Humason in the 20\'s and 30\'s who saw numerous different systems, and that these worlds were moving far from each other (which prompts to the idea of a growing universe and the Hubble Constant). Amid WWII, the government collaborated with industry and mainstream researchers to frame working organizations. Individuals figured out how to create transformational extends rapidly and "Huge Science" is conceived. A few researchers figure out how to play the diversion and stretch out themselves to be activists for essential projects. One of these, a stargazer, is Lyman Spitzer, Jr.

Slide 5

Hubble\'s Historical Context (proceeded) In 1946 Spitzer distributes "Galactic Advantages of an Extra-Terrestrial Observatory," for RAND. It lays out in detail interestingly the tremendous focal points of a space-based telescope. This report stays grouped for a considerable length of time. The US Army has been exploring different avenues regarding caught V2 rockets, some of which have been furnished with logical payloads. In 1950, at a supper party in his home, physicist James Van Allen and a few researchers consider the thought for a third International Polar Year – this will end up being the IGY. An expanding number of researchers are taking a gander at the space condition and new space age advancements to facilitate logical investigation. Different researchers and architects are additionally guessing about the new domain of conceivable outcomes for science, including Wernher von Braun, who depicts a kept an eye on orbital telescope in 1952. 1955: because of developing weight from researchers, the US National Academy of Sciences and National Science Foundation together consent to look for endorsement to circle a logical satellite amid the forthcoming IGY (to be 1957-1958). Amid this period, numerous researchers stay unconvinced of the thought to consume science into room. By and by a logical backing rises, and it figures out how to wind up politically shrewd. The worldview has moved to Big Science.

Slide 6

Hubble\'s Historical Context (proceeded) In 1958 (and taking after Sputnik), the Space Science Board of National Academy of Sciences calls for and gets several recommendations for take after on undertakings to IGY. These are sent to NASA\'s Space Science Working Group on "Orbital Astronomical Observatories (OAOs)" President Eisenhower excitedly underpins. Neglected War atmosphere, NASA is keen on showing what it can do. In 1960-61 it issues first RFP\'s for OAO arrangement. The argumentative connection amongst NASA and the science group brings frame with the OAO extend. Researchers who have been accustomed to taking complete charge of their science undertakings will now need to battle with lost control to NASA. On the positive side: With OAO, the possibility of a Guest Observer is presented – breaking from the possibility of strict control by a solitary Principal Investigator. This will have later ramifications as key researchers will demand that the new Large Telescope be a National Facility (open to all) On the negative side: 2 of 4 OAO missions come up short – in extensive part since NASA did not discuss well with the researchers and the innovation was excessively muddled. Reference: Smith, Robert W, et al. The Space Telescope: A Study of NASA, Science, Technology, and Politics. New York: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1989

Slide 7

Social and Political Conditions As NASA starts to truly mull over a Large Space Telescope, the money related and budgetary state of the country weighs intensely. This component, and how the different members see it, will end up being basic in characterizing Hubble\'s logical potential, administration, extreme cost, and timetable. By the mid-1970\'s the government spending plan has been overemphasized by the costs of war and the Great Society programs, and the economy is stagnating. NASA senior administration is focusing on the new Space Shuttle and the political atmosphere for new costly undertakings is threatening. NASA keeps on pursueing a LST by utilizing accessible assets (not requiring congressional endorsement) to store "Stage An" examines, constraining Marshall Space Flight Center to contend with Goddard Space Flight Center to wind up distinctly the lead focus. NASA Administrator Fletcher finds the Phase A cost gauges politically untenable – and requests MSFC to constrain the program cost to $300M. At last, all through the 1960\'s and 70\'s, the DoD has been building a progression of progressively advanced observation satellites, and it strengths controls on NASA that seriously point of confinement NASA\'s entrance to the innovation to secure mystery. Incidentally, similar organizations that know how to construct the recon satellites are at last chosen to manufacture Hubble. Reference: Smith, Robert W, et al. The Space Telescope: A Study of NASA, Science, Technology, and Politics. New York: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1989

Slide 8

Hubble\'s Participants – Key People and Agencies The four key members in the advancement lifecycle of Hubble: Space Agencies NASA Headquarters – the Office of Space Science trusts the LST is a noteworthy need, however senior administration were hesitant to propose any new program. MSFC – it had no stargazing mastery and was debilitated with conclusion at the season of the LST Phase An opposition; it needed the LST seriously and said as much. GSFC – it had the accomplished individuals and know-how to fabricate galactic sats (it was lead for OAO), yet was overburdened with venture work; it\'s Director was undecided about the venture. JSC, KSC and JPL would assume essential parts in the program as well. JSC\'s space explorers would demonstrate basic. JPL outlined and fabricated the WF/PC (and the $60M save). Stargazers and different researchers inside NASA would assume a critical part in planning with the science group, of these Dr Robert O\'Dell (Chief Project Scientist at MSFC) and Dr Nancy Roman of NASA HQ were essential. ESA – It needed a generous space science program however couldn\'t do it all alone, and NASA expected to fulfill Congress while consoling household researchers that they would not give up control as a cost for ESA\'s inclusion Executive and Legislative Branches of Government Executive Branch – in spite of spending imperatives forced by the Ford organization, the OMB and President Ford were for the most part strong, as were authorities in the Carter and Reagan organizations. Congress – Hubble will confront firm restriction from key congressional boards of trustees driving major deferrals and financial points of confinement. Congress will eventually command universal collaboration. The most noticeable rivals of Hubble were Representative Edward P. Boland (D-MA) and Senator William Proxmire (D-WI). Reference: Smith, Robert W, et al. The Space Telescope: A Study of NASA, Science, Technology, and Politics. New York: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1989

Slide 9

Key People and Agencies (proceeded with) Scientists and Advocates Individual researchers will come to spare the telescope by arousing their group and forcefully campaigning congress. Of these, the most persuasive will be Lyman Spitzer and John Bahcall, both of Princeton. Their cooperation with Robert O\'Dell (at MSFC) in campaigning Congress will come to be known as the "Princeton-Huntsville Axis." O\'Dell effectively advances the venture in logical diaries and introductions. Industry Many organizations added to LST/HST, including all real aviation firms, most in subcontractor parts to Lockheed Missiles and Space Company (CA) for the SSM, and to Perkin-Elmer (CT) for the OTA. Lockheed and P-E had considerable experience chipping away at exceptionally arranged PHOTOINT satellites. Different firms were shrunk by the colleges to assemble components of the Scientific Instruments. At different circumstances, corporate contenders cooperated and with NASA and outside researchers to hall congress at basic crossroads. Vitally, since both Lockheed and P-E were working as "partner contractual workers" – no organization was completely accused of frameworks building specialist, and NASA was not able play out this part enough . Reference: Smith, R

Recommended
View more...