Shameless Kissing Up To Congress at STScI
Space Astronomy Archive and Supernova Are Named for Senator Barbara Mikulski
“One of the world’s largest astronomy archives, containing a treasure trove of information about myriad stars, planets, and galaxies, has been named in honor of the United States Senator from Maryland, Barbara Mikulski. … In addition, an exploding star that the Hubble Space Telescope spotted on Jan. 25, 2012, has been named Supernova Mikulski by Nobel Laureate Adam Riess and the supernova search team with which he is currently working. The supernova, which lies 7.4 billion light-years away, is the titanic detonation of a star more than eight times our Sun’s mass.”
Keith’s note: This has to be one of the most shameless acts of kissing up to a congressional benefactor in recent years. Anything that Sen. Mikuski did in her job involved taxpayer dollars and she often favored projects in her own state at the expense of equally meritorious projects located in other states. I wonder if the STScI folks bothered to tell Sen. Mikulski that they can’t actually name stars after anyone. Under the archaic way that astronomers name objects and features, only the IAU can name things. Also, it would seem, according to IAU’s rules, that there is no process for naming a supernova after a person i.e. “Supernovae are named for their year of occurrance and an uppercase letter, e.g., “SN 1987A”. If the alphabet is exhausted, double lower case naming is used: [Year] aa .. az, ba .. bz, etc; e.g., “SN 1997bs”.” And if IAU does allow this name to become official they too become a party to this blatant act of political payback and simply undermine what the credibility that their naming rules have.
NASA Science Chief Statement on Naming of Space Telescope Science Institute’s Astronomical Database for Senator Mikulski
“The Space Telescope Science Institute’s decision to name its database for Senator Mikulski is an honor very much deserved. She is a tremendous advocate and supporter for science, NASA and the astrophysics community.”
Keith’s update: (Sigh) now NASA itself has gotten in on the official political pandering as well. Maybe we should name JSC’s Mission Control Center the “Kay Bailey Hutchison Mission Control Center” and the VAB the “Bill Nelson Big Rocket Barn”. I wonder how many hours were charged at NASA and STScI to concocting and celebrating this whole activity. I guess there is a side benefit to this. The next time JWST goes over budget Sen. Mikulski is certain to support another infusion of cash.
While one cannot “officially” name SN after anyone, Riess and collaborators have on occasion used informal names for various SN within their own research papers. No one else is obligated to use their designations, but they will be featured in their own literature. The journals are not bound to enforce IAU regulations, nor are individual astronomers. Further the cost of honoring Mikulski with a SN designation is zero.
MAST, itself, has long been used by astronomers. Here the cost of renaming it is also zero.
I rather doubt that they told Mikulski that this was not an official name. They just let her operate under the assumption that it is official. As for the cost, how many people attended this event? Do the math. It cost something.
Keith in this case you’re wrong. Astronomers do use names as the official designation for supernova discovered with HST. These names are accepted as the official designation and appear in refereed literature with their astronomer-given names. With HST discovered SNe, there is no other facility that can follow them up so the formality of using IAU is outmoded.
That’s not what the IAU website says.
Norman, I don’t disagree that the IAU naming convention might be outmoded at this point. But if it is, you then go to the IAU, propose a new naming convention, and have it voted on. You don’t sell it on a web site, or use it to suck up to a Senator, no matter how nice she’s been to you. And you sure as hell don’t go having press ops flouting all convention in the field.
Keith, your information is not accurate. The convention is to ask the IAU announce the discovery of relatively *nearby* supernovae because their existence can be easily agreed upon (i.e., before analysis in a publication) and its important to let other astronomers know so the supernova can be widely observed. But in the last ~decade when we have begun finding supernovae at incredible distances with the Hubble Space Telescope we do not ask the IAU to immediately announce the most distant of these supernovae because it takes careful analysis to declare it a supernova and there is no hurry because no other telescope can see it but Hubble (although all the Hubble data is public). So for a decade or so we have been naming the supernova ourselves. This name then becomes a real name in that we use it exclusively in the publication (assuming of course our final conclusion is that it is a supernova). The first supernova we found in this project was named “Supernova Primo” and that name remained through its publication in the Astrophysical Journal last month where the name Supernova Primo appeared more than 50 times in the text. So Supernova Mikulski is how it would appear in print. Other branches of science have named objects after people, fermions for Enrico Fermi, Einstenium for Einstein, telescopes (James Webb), etc. I think its a nice tradition to honor those who have helped enable science.
In terms of being “accurate” the text I quoted verbatim is taken directly from the IAU website so … I guess some astronomers can ignore the IAU while others are required to adhere to their rules? Interesting. Personally, I think you should be able to name things you discover – and that you should be free to honor people as you wish. In this case, however, I think NASA and STScI are pandering to a politician who defends projects in her home state – and I will wager that she is mostly clueless as to what astronomers do other than look at things in the night sky.
… don’t ALL state senators defend projects to their home states to bring it revenue??
Elements get named by the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry (IUPAC). So, yes, God bless if you go off an create a new element and call it Mikulskium in a further attempt to suck up. You still have to get it approved by IUPAC. Likewise, we’re supposed to have names go through the IAU (just go ask planet Xena…). So, you’re OK with places selling names of stars to the public? How is this any different, aside from the fact that the $8 Billion being pumped into JWST is a helluva lot more than most stars cost ($14.95 on starnamer.net, if you’re curious).
The inconsistencies WRT naming are glaring. The rules apply to some astronomers and some supernovas but not others.
Mikulski knows a heck of a lot more about what astronomers do than you do Keith.
Why don’t you come up with a pop quiz about what astronomers do and have both Sen. Mikulski and I take it – no notes, no calls to advisors, etc. Then we’ll see which one of us knows more …
Your jokes are sadly not far off the mark. We already have the Jake Garn Mission Training and Simulation Facility at JSC. At least, that is what the sign says, but no one in MOD has ever referred to it by that name.
And there is a NASA DSN dish named after Rep. Jerry Lewis, a radio telescope at Green Bank named after Sen. Byrd …
Keith–goodness knows, I disagree with you more than I agree with you, but you are spot-on here. Is this utterly embarrassing or what? Ugh…sorry; I’ve gotta go take a shower…
I agree dicoronylene, it is rather embarrassing. I think I’ll take a shower with you.
Er… I meant a shower, but in a different location.
As the co-discoverer of six supernovae, I’m very happy for Senator Mikulski. The International Astronomical Union has procedures for nomenclature of many kinds of new celestial objects, including supernovae. It should be up to the IAU to defend their exclusivity against rival nomenclature, in the same way as your state only allows one department of motor vehicles to operate. If the IAU’s rules are a boundary to everyone except Nobel laureates, does the little guy mind?
It occurred to me that an asteroid could be named after Ms. Mikulski as well, but the IAU naming guidelines forbid asteroids named after politicians until 100 years after their death, and discovered asteroids don’t disappear before the IAU like Hubble-only supernovae do. Asteroids are more often named after science fair winners as a reward for youthful excellence.
To name supernova or other celestial bodies using the names of political and notable people of the day reeks of egotism. Mikulski Supernova? Lady Gaga Black Hole? I think not. But to be fair and provide recognition there may be an alternative. Consider applying the names to the 100,000 pieces of sizeable orbital debris circling the Earth, and only the debris.
I like it! Naming space trash after politicians seems oddly appropriate.
Why not rename MSFC the Senator Shelby Design Bureau?
What a boring “controversy”. There are more celestial objects than people who were, are, and ever will be alive on this planet.
I agree with Kieth that this kind of pandering is disgusting. Mikulski didn’t invent anything or provide any of her own resources to this. She simply used her power to spend taxpayer money on programs for her own district, to help herself stay in power.
Naming something after a person who makes important intellectual contributions of a field makes sense. Even naming something after a financial benefactor makes sense, if that person spent his or her own money. But Mikulski is not a financial benefactor here. It was taxpayer money. The taxpayers are the benefactors.
When are we going to get “Supernova American Taxpayer”?
Star names are cheap. Congressmen have to raise $15,000 in bribes (technically campaign contributions) every single _day_ just to stay in office. Being corrupt is a requirement just for serving in Congress. Whether the next contract goes to ATK or SpaceX really depends on which can write a bigger check to Congressman Wolf, who chairs the subcommittee that controls NASA and science appropriations.
The Supreme Court made things much worse with the “Citizen’s United” decision, in which they said that even million dollar checks are “free speech”, and that I can hand one to your superpac if you pass a bill that makes me even richer. It makes a sham of democracy. If we can buy a legislator for the mere cost of a supernova, it is by comparison exemplary statesmanship.
Agreed that campaign contributions are a form of corruption, and that has a lot of negative effects.
However, banning big contributions creates entirely different problems. It basically heavily favors those who are already incumbents or who are well connected. In a way, the Citizens United decision opens up the field to more competition — anyone with money now has a way to challenge those already in political power. It’s certainly not an ideal situation, but it is arguably better because it gives more avenues for challengers to have their voices heard.
Forget it, Keith. My observation has been that everyone associated with HST is oblivious to the degree to which they owe their existence to the political mechanations of their fairy godmother. They’ll never see what’s wrong with it.
We have three NASA centers named after former senators, Johnson, Stennis and Glenn, all of them as a reward for supporting the creation or continued funding of the NASA center in their home state, so what else is new?
And don’t forget the Robert Byrd radio telescope in Greenbank.
As long as they don’t rename GSFC for Senator Mikulski, I don’t care if they give her a supernova that exploded long before the Earth even existed.