A view on space science and how it operates

A view on space science and how it operates

By Bambang Hidayat

BANDUNG (JP): In the past three decades our consciousness
about space and the earth as a habitable planet has been
influenced by a new discipline which is called space science. In
many ways space science has presented us with a new conception of
the world.

It made us realize that we live on a planet whose size is
diminutive, whose resources are not unlimited and, due to its
unique position relative to the sun, can only ensure our lives
through a very sensitive, destructible, protective system.

This is our atmosphere -- a very thin smear of atmospheric
gases. It is like a thin membrane covering the earth, yet it is
an active part of the system and creates within it a structure
and balance of gases which is essential to maintaining life.

Without space science, and what it entails, namely space
technology, the facts cited above would not have been realized to
the extent they have.

The public often sees contradictory stories in the media about
global or climatic change or even about weather predictions.

Not knowing how science operates, people could easily blame
the meteorologist for not knowing his science. Worse still they
could accuse science of fallacy, for not being able to produce
"true information".

The obvious results from this ill-informed belief may be
severe if policymakers decide to suspend any action until
scientists agree about what is happening.

Seemingly controversial issues which bounce around actually
are the working mechanism in science which cannot escape from
setting boundaries on the limits of knowledge.

Most of us would have no difficulty in differentiating between
risk and true uncertainty. The first is an event with a known
probability and the second is an event with unknown probability.
Policymakers like to make unambiguous, defensible decisions,
which are often codified into laws and regulations. Inherent
within this system is their desire to know the risk of what they
are doing, rather than a true scientific uncertainty.

It is common nowadays for the public to read in newspapers
that "a respected scientific institution" claims "global warming
is coming" and unless something is done to prevent it,
catastrophe will occur. Not long afterward the same public will
hear from "a reputable scientist" that "there is no direct
evidence for global warming".

Some people will react with: "Don't waste money on something
that may or may not happen"; but other, more moderate people, are
likely to adopt a more positive approach: "Try to prove which is
true". Both sources are certainly right in expressing their
findings because they stress two different things.

Considering what is known about future climate change, it is
easy to stress a wide range of uncertainties. We should recognize
that what they know is substantial and useful information.

An assertion of the magnitude of climatic change may come from
researchers' inability to identify overlooked or underestimated
physical effects that could reduce estimated global warnings due
to, for example, a doubling of carbon dioxide levels in the air.

In order to narrow the limit of uncertainties, many new
avenues of research are being encouraged.

There should exist a healthy dichotomy between research and
narrowing down the uncertainly. Regarding the case for global
temperature increase, which is used as a fundamental measure of
the effect of increasing trace gases, modeling studies of cloud
effects, surface hydrological and high-altitude response are
among the areas of study that should be pursued.

Uncertainties can be obtained from all statistical methods
known to scientists. The long university training, whether in
undergraduate or research laboratories, should be able to
cultivate this kind of culture so that the scientist-to-be gets
used to this salient feature of scientific work.

Manipulation

In general, scientists reach uncertainties rather than
absolute precision. But when it is improperly disseminated, the
findings could be mistaken by the public who usually associates
uncertainty with scientific results.

Many results from space science have been propagated beyond
university and academic walls. Some necessarily invade
legislative offices. Space remote sensing is one of the versatile
instruments to monitor land and natural habitat. In recent years
its results have been used to delineate national policies.

It is our utmost concern that the language of the science of
remote sensing be made compatible with legislators' language.
Although legislative language is often open to interpretation,
regulations and rules are much easier to write and enforce if
they are stated in absolute terms.

Study of gas traces in an area provides information which is,
by nature, only certain within the study's epistemological and
methodological limits. Regulators are increasingly confronted
with the decision process of scientific certainty.

But all of us know how difficult it is to deal with the recent
shift in environmental concerns from visible pollution and
deforestation to subtle threats to life such as radon and
dehydrification.

Scientists are often asked or pressured by legislators to
supply such so-far-non-exact-information. When this happens, not
only do frustration and poor communication prevail but also mixed
messages appear in the media. Because of this uncertainty,
environmental issues are often manipulated by political and
economic groups. Scientists coming late on to the scene and other
pure-minded groups may be left in the dark, as is often the case
with the pollution effects of toxic chemicals.

The future

Like other new technology, space technology creates many
technical spin-offs and new cultures. People who commit
themselves to space technology are working at the highest levels
of technological developments in what is a technological age.
They should also know the basic premises of technology as
otherwise they will be degraded to being poor users of new
technology.

An important characteristic of space technology is the great
challenge of the hostile space environment. This threat alone,
which is also more severe in respect of material than is
generally known, forms energizing factors for scientific
pursuits. It is a challenge for the scientists and engineers
connected with and working in space technology. Ultimately it
fosters the birth of innovation in many fields of science and
human perception.

In order to appreciate the meaning of the newly discovered
frontier, a nation has to establish scientific knowledge which is
a prerequisite for progress.

Science literacy does not mean memorizing facts about science
and technology but it is a state of mind which enables one to
incorporate exogenous knowledge into the existing frames of
indigenous capabilities. Lectures on any level of education
should be able to transmit basic concepts of science and
technology, rather than transferring the mere facts of data.
Uncertainty in science should be presented in terms of errors in
measurements so that science students become aware of the power
and limitation of their knowledge.

Many branches of space science are very close to the
discipline of basic science. As basic science is also supposed to
satisfy one's "innate curiosity", teachers and educators should
develop the ability to arouse the interest of their pupils.

One way to do that is to be very explicit about the humanistic
aspects of space science and the processes which have led to any
discovery. The advances of science and technology need special
attention to the end that all citizens of modern society acquire
reasonable understanding of the subjects and that those with
special talents in space science find full opportunity to develop
their abilities.

The writer is head of Bosscha Observatory and a lecturer in
the School of Astronomy, Bandung Institute of Technology.