It seems to be a really exciting time in astronomy -- not just the discoveries, but the controversies over them, too. An old aquantaince of mine from Kitt Peak, Michael Brown, now at Caltech who was a discoverer of the "10th Planet" mentioned below in my blog, may have had the discovery of another larger trans-Neptunian object stolen from him. The New York Times has a recent article explaining the controversy. Basically, after announcing the discovery in an abstract prior to a meeting and publication, a Spanish group announced their own discovery.
That's okay. Sometimes you get scooped.
Except in this case, somone did an internet search on the name of the object Brown had used in his abstract. That internet search took them into the observing logs of the telescope Brown used to make regular observations of this object. Tracing the internet logs led straight back to the Spanish group before their own announcement.
At worst, they may have stole the discovery. At best, they confirmed their discovery and didn't want to share any credit at all. Either way strikes me as unethical. It strikes quite a few astronomers that way, too.
Scientists rely on their reputations. Sully the reputation, destroy the scientist. Who will trust their work in the future? The Spanish astronomers may be screwed either way at this stage.
They're also quoted in the article as complaining about Browns "secret ways" and how he's too slow to share his results. That's offensive, too. Mistakes are often made in the rush to publication. It can take a very long time to make sure every detail is right and fits together, and sometimes a good result can become a great result with additional work. Everyone agrees that data and results should be published as fast as reasonable, but to criticize another scientist about their rate is rather shitty. Lord knows I wish I published faster. I tried to rush a couple of papers through this summer, and the referee's reports are more critical than those I usually receive, so it can also be spend the time now or spend it later.
This human element dirties the so-called Ivory Tower and depressed me for a few months in graduate school when I realized how it permeated academia as much as any other field. What got me through then, and now, is another realization.
Scientists are human, with human failings, but Science itself is a system, a methodology, that forges ahead and gets to the right results despite its human components. This new world beyond Neptune was going to discovered and published one way or another, and we'll learn more about it in the future no matter the career path of a few individual scientists. Ideally Justice is blind, and so is Science.
Posted by Mike at September 17, 2005 9:53 PM