Subscribe to RSS feed
Dave Bacon is a theoretical ski bum who is also a pseudo 
Direct imaging of extra solar planets. The cat dynamicist has the details. (because, linking, I've heard, is good.) Fomalhaut b, a nice name.
When I was on the road to becoming an astrophysicist, as a young grad student, I remember thinking how cool it would be to join the planet hunters. I mean being able to say that in your research you "discovered a planet" well how cool would that be. Alas I caught the quantum bug and so all those days spent studying the interstellar tedium are now lost, like tears in the rain.
Comments
Interstellar tedium?
Posted by: Stephen | November 14, 2008 1:09 AM
So you think your career works better if you don't planet?
Posted by: Ian | November 14, 2008 7:24 AM
Stephen: have you seen how much chemistry you need to understand to the interstellar medium. Definitely the interstellar tedium. :)
Posted by: Dave Bacon | November 14, 2008 10:52 AM
Dave: that's funny. I was literally doing the same thing. Started out in grad school in astrophysics thinking I might do extrasolar planet hunting until I got the quantum bug.
Ian: absolutely! :))
Posted by: Ian Durham | November 14, 2008 2:32 PM
You've done a man's job, sir. It's too bad she won't live... but then again, who does?
Posted by: Mike | November 14, 2008 5:13 PM
Thank you, Dave, for quoting the line "lost like tears in the rain", which is surely among the most wonderful ad-libs in movie history ...
The study of complexity---when regarded as the study of rain as contrasted with the study of tears---is perhaps the perfect line of research for all who like to contemplate the "big picture."
Posted by: John Sidles | November 14, 2008 9:44 PM
Just `cuz I too admire this topic, I would like to point out that NASA's planet-searching New Worlds Mission is on-track to receive three billion dollars in funding.
What have they good that quantum information science has not got? Well, QIS arguably has better mathematics and sexier physics than planet-searching (although planet-searching does pretty well in both categories).
But planet-searching arguably has better engineering and a more-readily comprehensible mission. The result is that planet-searching ends up with top-quality fundamental research *and* top-quality engineering and applications.
The point being, the QIS might benefit from a similar upgrade.
Posted by: John Sidles | November 17, 2008 11:28 AM