eliothalley.bsky.social
dynamics of all the little guys: M dwarfs + BDs + planets
Smith College + FCAD postdoc fellow + RECONS
🏳️⚧️ he/him since 2012 🏳️🌈 http://astro.gsu.edu/~vrijmoet/
286 posts
1,200 followers
187 following
Prolific Poster
Conversation Starter
comment in response to
post
Agreed, they are major journals. I'm just arguing that they're not THE key players, as J Davenport pointed out. The field would be ok without them -- we don't *need* Science and Nature to highlight the big milestones.
comment in response to
post
The Science and Nature publications are definitely impactful, but IMO they don't make up the bulk of the astro's progress. The work that *collectively* moves the field forward is generally found in AJ, ApJ, etc.
comment in response to
post
Of the 4 AAG submissions on my radar (all colleagues', not mine), all have been rejected now.
Occasionally I've been checking the NSF website here:
www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/...
...which does show a few recent awards, but I'm guessing it's too early for most from the standard November cycle?
comment in response to
post
Oh yeah, fair enough, this spring's chaos really throws a wrench in things! Fingers crossed for the power of many incremental changes in the meantime, then :)
comment in response to
post
Yvette this is amazing progress! Finally there will be options for astronomy in OR. :)
Do you have a sense of the timescale for this astro faculty expansion? Like 2 yr vs. 10 yr?
comment in response to
post
I guess NASA already knows this, because it's their program. But it's still so sad.
comment in response to
post
This one is so upsetting. The STEM Engagement Office doesn't just host physics demos. They fund tons of internships -- literally funding people's first jobs in science. Those people might choose science careers not just bc it seems cool, but bc they got to TRY that work and *know* they love it.
comment in response to
post
This is such goals! and also I'm so confused about when those two became 10 years old. What is time?!
comment in response to
post
I saw several student presentations this semester that claimed "now that we've found 6,000 planets" -- and I was like, wait already?!
comment in response to
post
It's possible though for both those things to be true and needing attention -- gen Z's failing fact vs. fiction ability as well as Fox-loving boomers' abilities.
comment in response to
post
I mean, it probably is a correlation. Twitter and FB started then because the internet reached a certain level of usability and audience size. The internet reaching those levels led to more people spending reading time on low-effort content that ultimately reduced their "IQ".
comment in response to
post
I actually don't know! But that's really part of the motivation under my initial question. If most schools use one particular funding model for these, we could predict a little how those opportunities will weather recent changes.
comment in response to
post
Right, I'm thinking more small scale. Internal grants are how I've been funding undergrads, and they've been invaluable for accomplishing the bits and pieces that don't require years of specialized training. We're lucky that so much basic astro research can be done in this model.
comment in response to
post
Think it will be any better at small private vs large public institutions? I'm thinking like, are there institutions that might have more $$ for smaller internal grants?
comment in response to
post
Hey Dan, on the bar chart I see one grant in the AST division, but I don't see any AST grants listed on that grant-watch page. Am I missing a step?
comment in response to
post
When I arrived at Smith they told me casually, "oh we hold all our department meetings as walk-and-talks around the pond" and I was like, wow what paradise have I landed in!