Skip to main content

Epilogue: Why Did We Write This Book?

  • Chapter
Under the Radar

Part of the book series: Astrophysics and Space Science Library ((ASSL,volume 363))

  • 837 Accesses

Abstract

The rationale of our writing this description of the life of Ruby Payne-Scott has an ironic origin. John Bolton and Ruby Payne-Scott were viewed by colleagues at RPL as antagonists (Chap. 8); the “bust up” at Dover Heights between the two in late 1947 had been announced to Pawsey by McCready a few months after Pawsey left for his trip to the US and Europe. Payne-Scott had been “exiled” to the Hornsby site, a result that had positive scientific results (Chap. 8). We were surprised to learn of these antipathies in 1999. In the 1940s and 1950s, RPL was characterised by strong personalities. The characterisation of the “triangle of antagonism at RPL” between Bolton, Payne-Scott and Piddington has been described in Chap. 1.1 Indeed, there were turbulent relationships among some of the senior scientific staff. In 2007, Mills2 suggested a fascinating theory that provides a whimsical view of the political alignment of the early years of radio astronomy at RPL. This suggestion is consistent with the dynamic that led to the partial rupture of RPL in the early 1960s as Mills and Christiansen left for the University of Sydney (School of Physics and Electrical Engineering, respectively). Shortly afterwards, in 1962, Pawsey left RPL for the National Radio Astronomy Observatory (Green Bank, West Virginia, USA), just before his premature death on 30 November 1962, at the age of 54. Mills postulates that two camps were already taking shape in the late 1940s and early 1950s: the “English” faction of Taffy Bowen (the Chief of the Division), and the recently recruited scientific staff member, John Bolton.3 This faction was in contrast to the “Australian” camp of Ruby Payne-Scott, Chris Christiansen and Bernie Mills. According to Mills, Pawsey was in neither camp as “he tried to keep things on an even keel. He knew there would be trouble; he hoped for simple and healthy competition which was not the way it turned out.” Paul Wild, an Englishman, was “in the middle with a foot in both camps.” In the end, Australian radio astronomy flourished. After 1960, Mills, Christiansen, Wild, Bowen and Bolton remained leaders in this rapidly expanding field.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    See footnote 5 in Chap. 1. There were other well known conflicts. The following sentence in the memoir continued: “One well known antagonism was that between the Chief of the Division of Radiophysics, Taffy [E. G.] Bowen, and an earlier Chief, D.F. Martyn, with whom Piddington was close friends.”

  2. 2.

    Interview with Goss, 1 April 2007, Roseville (Sydney), NSW. Mills suggested that the two camps had a different set of standards regarding rigour in science. In addition, the “English” camp had a fascination for cricket; the “Australians” were not cricket fanatics.

  3. 3.

    Both were born in the UK.

  4. 4.

    Goss had been a NATO Postdoctoral Fellow at RPL under the direction of Bolton from 1967 to 1970. From 1974 to 1977, he was a Principal Research Scientist at RPL.

  5. 5.

    Confusion is the limitation in radio astronomy which occurs when the density of radio sources in the sky is so large that individual sources blend with neighbours. In the presence of confusion, even a sensitive radio telescope cannot be used to recognise weak sources. Pawsey described confusion to Reber on 20 March 1950 (NAA; A1/1/1 Part 5): “There is also a major difficulty in interpretation of records where several sources produce interfering patterns. We at present use common sense and low cunning but there may be better methods.” Sadly, we can find no-one who can confirm the assertion by Bolton that Payne-Scott initiated discussions about the relevance of confusion in radio astronomy among the RPL group. [Grote Reber (1911–2002) was a prominent pre-World War II radio astronomer; he constructed a radio telescope in his backyard in Wheaton, Illinois (near Chicago) in 1937. The radio telescope (now at the NRAO), was 31.4 ft or 9.6 m in diameter. In 1938 he confirmed Jansky’s 1932 detection of radio emission from the Milky Way. In the 1950s he moved to Bothwell, Tasmania, where he constructed low frequency arrays. Sullivan (Cosmic Noise, A History of Early Radio Astronomy, 2009) gives a comprehensive summary of Reber’s early career.]

  6. 6.

    Used with Sullivan’s permission (October 2008).

  7. 7.

    Letter to Goss, 24 January 2004.

  8. 8.

    Interview, February 2007.

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

(2010). Epilogue: Why Did We Write This Book?. In: Goss, W.M., McGee, R.X. (eds) Under the Radar. Astrophysics and Space Science Library, vol 363. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-03141-0_16

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics