
China Built the World’s Largest Telescope, Then Came the Tourists - chriskanan
https://www.wired.com/story/china-fast-worlds-largest-telescope-tourists/
======
zcbenz
It is interesting that the tourism income from FAST telescope, has far
exceeded its construction costs.

From
[https://www.guancha.cn/society/2017_08_25_424435.shtml](https://www.guancha.cn/society/2017_08_25_424435.shtml)
:

> 据悉，平塘县依靠旅游观光，上半年的营收达46亿人民币，较去年同期增加了40％。

> It is reported that relying on tourism, the revenue of Pingtang town in the
> first half of the year has reached 4.6 billion yuan, an increase of 40% over
> the same period last year.

From
[http://www.wenxuecity.com/news/2017/10/03/socialnews-144514....](http://www.wenxuecity.com/news/2017/10/03/socialnews-144514.html)
:

> 7天80万人贵州看“大锅” 五星酒店最贵一夜4888

> In 7 days, 800,000 people went to Guizhou to see the "big pot". Most
> expensive room in five-star hotel has reached 4888 yuan.

~~~
majos
Obligatory "can we trust official Chinese statistics?". Gaming local numbers
after a lavishly-funded project seems to have been popular for a while [1].

[1] [https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-economy-
fraud/china...](https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-economy-fraud/china-
to-publish-unified-gdp-data-in-fraud-crackdown-statistics-bureau-
idUSKBN1CZ0H6?il=0)

~~~
IIAOPSW
8 is a lucky number in Chinese.

So I'm not surprised if the 5 star room costs exactly 4,888. I wouldn't be
surprised if the visitor number was rounded to 800k, but I doubt the number is
made from whole cloth.

~~~
natmaka
4 (the first figure in this "4888 yuans" price) is an unlucky number in China.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_numerology#Four](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_numerology#Four)

~~~
fipple
Yes but you can’t change the pricing of something by 25% to make it
auspicious.

~~~
close04
Going from 4888 to 5000 is not such a huge leap if numerology is a serious
concern.

~~~
kabacha
I think OP meant that they want three 8s in the number. If it costs 5000
dropping to 4888 is a small loss but dropping to 3888 is too much, so is
raising to 5888.

~~~
belorn
Wouldn't it be easier to just go to 5088? about as small change as going to
4888.

~~~
rejschaap
They decided the extra 8 is worth more than eliminating the 4. Contrary to
popular belief, this is not a hard science.

------
xevb3k
“At other telescopes, astronomers are developing machine-learning algorithms
that could identify, extract, and compensate for dirty data“

Whenever I see “machine-learning” in the context of scientific development I
just mentally replace it with “magic”.

Employing machine learning, at the data acquisition stage, is a really bad
idea. It can easily introduce biases...

~~~
oh-kumudo
I mean de-noising techniques, nowadays can be definitely claimed as Machine
Learning, even though they have long existed prior to even ML as a concept
even being invented...

~~~
wadkar
I think the defining characteristic if machine learning system is that they
get better as they experience more (see more examples). The question then the
ask is two fold (a) do de-nosing techniques improve when they see more
samples? (b) do the application of ML techniques applied in this context
mathematically equivalent?

~~~
hikarudo
That is only the case for online learning systems. Offline learning is
definitely machine learning.

------
jpatokal
Building an "Astronomy Town" in the middle of nowhere and expecting it to
attract tourists permanently has echoes of Japan's bubble era written all over
it. Random point of comparison: [https://soranews24.com/2018/04/24/eerie-
dystopian-view-emerg...](https://soranews24.com/2018/04/24/eerie-dystopian-
view-emerges-as-japan-dismantles-one-of-its-departed-bubble-era-amusement-
parks/)

Japan's domestic tourism boom was done in by the triple combo of recession (30
years and counting), depopulation and Japanese finding it cheaper and more
interesting to travel overseas. Sooner or later these will hit China too.

~~~
mrhappyunhappy
Yep. Live in a destination relic of Miyazaki. Used to get a ton of tourists,
now people just go abroad.

~~~
therealdrag0
Why is it cheaper to go abroad?

~~~
rootedbox
Volume of people traveling to a given place lowers the cost.. This also exists
in the U.S. It's cheaper for me from SF to fly to Lima, Peru than to
Knoxville, Tn.

------
batbomb
This isn’t the only stupid telescope. Just outside Shanghai city limits is the
Tian Ma radio telescope. It’s 65m. I went there, I don’t think it’s used at
all, and it was completed in 2012

~~~
SiempreViernes
A depressingly common pattern is that you can get funding for building things
but not for running and maintaining things.

In the case of the Tian Ma they seem to still have money for work on it, I
found a 2017 proceeding[1] about adding a new system optimised for pulsar
searches.

I'm guessing they simply aren't getting very exciting results, which is normal
for a non-american dish, you don't hear about Effelsberg every day either.

[1]:
[https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8105313/](https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8105313/)

~~~
batbomb
You can see Shanghai from it the location (on a clear day). I don’t think they
operate it much because of the noise issue. Apparently they also even more
rarely point it.

------
bmc7505
Better make sure they don't broadcast anything towards the sun...

~~~
xevb3k
And here I was thinking I’d try to get in first with a Three Body Problem
reference, but you beat me to it.

It’s interesting though, China does appear to have a much stronger commitment
to radio astronomy than the US (at least that’s how the article characterizes
it).

I wonder why that is? The article didn’t really discuss why radio astronomy is
so attractive...

~~~
sandworm101
Why? How about the direct military applications? Resolving the signal from a
distant black hole, the true light against a haze of static, is exactly how
you detect the low-level radar reflection of a stealthy aircraft, or the sound
of a submarine against the background of pistol shrimp. Teasing out
information from a tiny radio signal, even using radio to image objects, that
definitely has a military use.

~~~
xevb3k
Yes, but none of those problems requiring building a really really big radio
telescope.

Sure there are some common data analysis techniques, but they are common to a
lot of applications.

~~~
jazzyjackson
Maybe having the largest telescope will attract more top talent to the field
:)

------
nayuki
For a radio telescope in the USA, the Wendover Productions channel made a good
video about banning radio sources - "Why Wifi is Illegal in Green Bank, West
Virginia":
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TjCZ6k7EzjE](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TjCZ6k7EzjE)

------
Eric_WVGG
remember Contact, where they made two? They should have built a fake biggest
telescope and put the real one behind that other mountain over yonder

------
maxxxxx
There was a time when you went to the US to see the most advanced or biggest
things. Now China seems to be determined to play that role.

~~~
briandear
We can call it “most advanced” when it actually works.

The US and Europe also don’t have inferiority complexes where they feel like
they have to build the tallest or biggest anymore. Look at skyscraper
competitions — generally 2nd tier countries trying to outdo each other for
bragging rights but for no real other reason. It’s like the Soviet Olympic
team — they had to win to make the political statement trunpeting a triumph of
communism. The US did the same thing once upon a time, but then we grew up
(and not necessarily for the better.. it’s a lot of fun to be “first, bigger,
best.”) 1990s Korea, modern China, 1950s USA, the Soviet Union — those places
and eras were representative of a national need to foster patriotism to create
unity against real or perceived competitors on the world stage as well as
remind the proles of the power and achievements of their benevolent state.

~~~
TangoTrotFox
Do you know the one thing all great mega-powers of the past have in common?
They no longer exist. Ceasing to strive to be the best and greatest at
everything is not 'growing up', it's resting on your laurels. There's much
more than just bragging rights to being 'first, bigger, best'. Technology is
what dictates and drives society. If Germany or Japan (or Italy or ...) had
developed nuclear weapons before the US, the world would be quite a different
place today. If North Korea had not developed nuclear deterrence, Kim would
now likely rest alongside Gadaffi and Hussein.

And while it's now easy to say in hindsight 'Well, [insert new form of bigger,
better, badder] is not particle physics.' This is true, but at time nobody
knew where particle physics would take us. The idea of bomb the size of a
small table that could destroy entire cities is something that would have
seemed impossible before the US worked to to become 'bigger, better, badder'
in what was at one time mostly theoretical particle research.

The worst part of this all is that while we don't know the future, we do have
a very good idea of where it's headed. Space is likely where the nest greatest
achievements and breakthroughs will come from. But predicting how or where is
going to be all but impossible, which is why working to be the king of all
pursuits is critical. China is headed straight in this direction. They have
not matched our technical skills yet, but at the time when we were conquering
the world through technology and taking the baby steps into the computer age
-- China was a backwoods nation where people were literally starving to death
by the tens of millions. That they're now the second most powerful nation in
the world, pushing forward technology and development at an unprecedented
rate, is way more than enough reason to believe that one should not
underestimate their resolve and ability.

~~~
dnomad
The irony behind all of this is that to the neoliberal mindset China's
extraordinary willingness to invest in pure research is some sort of Communist
plot. Literally, discussions just a few weeks ago about China taking the lead
on R&D spending in 2019 [1] and having that lead become "indefinite" by 2025,
break down (not unlike this thread) into mindless accusations against Big
Government. Of course the Chinese will tell you China is just doing exactly
what the West did post-War when huge government investments in science and
technology provided transformative wealth that gave Westerners the best
quality-of-life in the world.

The real story here is that while China's strategy is risky -- there's no
guarantee all this investment will pay off -- you could argue the neoliberal
strategy is even riskier. Technology tends to be a winner take all affair and
it's very often the first to market that wins.

[1]
[https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-00536-1](https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-00536-1)

------
Taylor_OD
Holy shit. That picture is incredible. The scale of that thing...

------
acoye
At Arecibo radio telescope they do not allow something like a single microwave
oven in a large radius. So for something that is intended to be even more
sensible … yeah

------
adventured
They spent about 150% the cost of the telescope in moving 9,000 people from
the area around the telescope. Then they plan a city nearby for hundreds of
thousands of people.

That can't be a decision of scientists involved in FAST. Only a bureaucrat
would do something that stupid.

~~~
natmaka
If I understand correctly they displaced people who where very near the
telescope, and then created a city 10 miles away from it and behind mountains
which interrupt at least some wave propagation(?). The article states that the
town lies "just a few miles from the displaced villagers’ demolished houses"
and also "There are a great many mountains between the telescope and the town"
(the mountains may reside in those few miles).

~~~
A2017U1
There's a ban on mobiles and laptops within 5km of the telescope.

I have no idea how far away the towns are but that seems impossible to enforce
with tourists. I guess it just doesn't operate during certain hours because of
interference.

~~~
natmaka
Maybe by forbidding all and any service in this area, including
implanting/enabling GSM antennas. The local government is powerful enough.
Most remaining RFI would be smartphones emissions, but as they will be nearly
useless in this area most people may accept to switch them in airplane mode
(and will be able to use the camera).

See also
[http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1086/588679](http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1086/588679)
("CONCLUDING REMARKS" section).

------
idoescompooters
I don't know. I'm pretty skeptical about its technical capabilities myself. At
the moment they only have a very small sliver of bandwidth they are capable of
receiving. I'm unsure on how exactly they plan to receive all of these
different bands at once when they are eventually added. Also, their chosen
technique of removing RFI after taking in the data (noise) from space is
questionable.

