This statement is, I think, dangerously wrong: "costs can be saved by building fewer antennas or reducing computing power, for example. “Not all of those will kill science cases, but rather may delay them.”
physicsworld.com/a/square-kilom…
physicsworld.com/a/square-kilom…
Many parts of the SKA science case have already been watered down, but the PR continues unabated.
But if it is gutted further before construction gets underway its impact in critical areas used to justify its construction will be significantly and seriously diminished.
But if it is gutted further before construction gets underway its impact in critical areas used to justify its construction will be significantly and seriously diminished.
On top of that, the SKA leadership SHOULD have seen this coming. But when key people spoke in New Zealand in February we were repeatedly reassured that everything was on track.
Two different conclusions might follow from these facts, but neither of them smells good.
Two different conclusions might follow from these facts, but neither of them smells good.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
