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.