?

Log in

No account? Create an account
Sauntering Vaguely Downward [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
Mad Scientess Jane Expat

Serious Business | Flickr
Bounty Information | Wanted Dead or Alive: Mad Scientess Nanila
Deeds of Derring-Do | Full of Wild Inaccuracies and Exaggerations

They had to settle for Extremely Large instead. [20080703|11:40]
Mad Scientess Jane Expat
[Tags|, , ]
[the weather today is |two days to holiday]
[with a hint of |M.I.A. - Paper Planes (on repeat)]

Ex-boss: "They were going to build an Overwhelmingly Large Telescope, but they had to can it."
Me: "Really? Why?"
Him, straight-faced: "It was too big."
linkReply

Comments:
[User Picture]From: sekl
2008-07-03 16:52 (UTC)
I love your work.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: nanila
2008-07-03 23:27 (UTC)
Morning tea is either a source of great wit and brilliance, or full of dull accounts of people's commutes in to work. Today was a good day.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: taische
2008-07-06 21:47 (UTC)
1.5 billion euros for a 100m device was too much, but 1.2 billion for a 40m one is reasonable? I can see asking whether or not people should be forced to pay for one at all (don't get me wrong- I would certainly break open my piggy bank and kick in voluntarily). However, getting close to three times the area and a commensurate increase in resolving power for 25% more money? This one seems like a no-brainer if one has already accepted that the building of a telescope is the sort of thing worth forcing money from the masses for (unless, of course, the OWL was too big in a technical sense).
(Reply) (Thread)