Archive for April, 2024

El Castell de Barbablava – Teatre del Liceu

Posted in Barcelona, Opera with tags , , , , , on April 13, 2024 by telescoper

I was thinking last weekend that in, all the time I’ve spent in Barcelona this year, and all the times I’ve travelled through the Metro station called Liceu, I’ve never been inside the Gran Teatre del Liceu. I decided to remedy that by booking a ticket to see last night’s performance of Bluebeard’s Castle, a one-act Opera by Béla Bartók. The theatre is actually on La Rambla, and I had to dodge through the hordes of tourists to get there, but it’s an easy walk from my apartment.

El Liceu is indeed very beautiful inside and deserves its reputation as one of the world’s finest opera houses. The main hall is about the same size as that of the Royal Opera House in Covent Garden, with a seating capacity of over 2,000, and it does have a similar decor, with red and gold everywhere. When I booked my ticket (on Monday) there were plenty of seats available to choose from, so I wondered what the attendance would be like. As it turned out, it wasn’t quite full but there was a good crowd in.

I have seen Bluebeard’s Castle a couple of times before, but it surprises me that there are no old reviews in my back catalogue on this blog. From that observation I deduce that both times I saw it were before 2008, which is when I started blogging. I do think it’s a masterpiece, however, which is why I jumped at the chance to see and hear it again. Last night’s was a concert performance, i.e. without staging, which works well with this Opera as there are only two principals and it sometimes it’s good to leave a lot to the listener’s imagination. The performance was in the original Hungarian language, with surtitles provided in Catalan, Spanish and English.

The Opera is based on a French folk legend of Bluebeard, a murderous character foreshadowing Jack the Ripper, and Judith, who has for some reason fallen in love with him, despite it being widely believed that he murdered his previous wives. She travels with him to his castle and, when they arrive, she starts to ask Bluebeard some uncomfortable questions as she makes her way through the dark castle. Seven doors appear to which Bluebeard holds the keys. Each one will reveal information about the personality and past of a Bluebeard. The first door opens to reveal a blood-soaked torture chamber, for example. And that’s just the start…

The final door reveals his former wives, apparently still alive. But are they ghosts? Who knows? Judith doesn’t seem to mind. She becomes the fourth wife and disappears into the darkness enfolding the other three. That’s the end.

The Opera doesn’t really have that much to do with the folk story. It is really an allegory – the rooms contain secrets of Bluebeard’s past, including past relationships, which he has locked away deep inside himself. Only Judith’s persistent questioning can persuade him to reveal them.

The music for Bluebeard’s Castle is extraordinarily rich and varied, changing as each door is opened. A large orchestra is needed to produce these changes of texture, as you can see in the picture I took before the performance. The musicians, under the direction of Josep Pons, played superbly as well as supplying eery sighs when the libretto demanded it. Vocals were supplied by bass-baritone Nicholas Brownlee as Bluebeard and mezzo soprano Victoria Karkacheva; both were excellent.

The performance lasted only about an hour. One of the things about going to an Opera in the evening is that one usually has to have something to eat before the performance, because it’s likely to be too late afterwards to find anywhere still serving food. That doesn’t apply here in Spain, where people generally eat rather late. I was thinking as I left last night that it was the first time I had been to an Opera that started at 7.30pm after which it was still too early to have dinner!

In Praise of the Public Thesis Defence

Posted in Barcelona, Education, The Universe and Stuff with tags , , , , , on April 12, 2024 by telescoper

The ICCUB is quite large, which means that there are quite a few talks to go to, including seminars and colloquia but also thesis defences, such as one I attended this morning. The format for these events is a talk by the candidate in the presence of a panel of experts, who ask questions at the end, but the whole thing is open to the general public. After the panel questions there is an opportunity for questions from the audience, but only from those who have a doctorate. I was tempted, but didn’t put my hand up.

Anyway, this morning’s talk was well attended and of very high quality and, as usual, the whole event lasted getting on for two hours. It’s a very different experience from the form of viva voce examinations used for PhDs in the UK and Ireland.

I like to attend these public thesis defences because they’re a very good way of finding out about the research going on in areas away from my own specialism. In physics the people who are really working at the coal face are the PhD students so one often learns more about the details from such talks than from colloquia from senior folk, which are usually cover a wider area but at a more superficial level.

Another nice thing is that there is a little gathering afterwards (on the right) with a selection of food and drink available to celebrate the candidate’s success. In fact it was a double celebration as the candidate was offered a postdoctoral research position just two days ago. I abstained from the champagne as alcohol at lunchtime usually sends me to sleep in the afternoon, and I have a lot to do in the rest of today.

Citations from Beyond the Grave

Posted in Uncategorized with tags , , , , , , , on April 11, 2024 by telescoper

It seems to be widely believed (by those responsible for research assessment) that what is important about research papers and their authors is not the research they describe but how many citations they attract. Thinking about this recently yet another anomaly in this attitude struck me arising from the fact that papers continue to attract citations long after the authors are dead. It seems surprising therefore institutions have not tried harder to use the citations of deceased researchers to boost their research profile. The last Research Excellence Framework in the UK allowed institutions to claim some credit for work by researchers who had moved on to another institution. Why then not allow institutions to claim credit for researchers who passed away?

The obvious problem with this idea is that it might encourage University managers to do even more than they do already to work their staff into an early grave. It seems to me the answer to that is obvious. Researchers should be allowed to stipulate in their last will and testament whom they would like to benefit from post-mortem citations. Or indeed carry some form of donor card…

The free market solution would of course be to set up a market to allow the citations accrued after death of a researcher to be traded.

Another anomaly is that the deceased are generally – though see here for an exception – not allowed to be authors on new papers. I think this is highly discriminatory. You might argue that a dead person can contribute neither to the writing of a paper nor contribute to the scientific discussions that led to it, nor even read a draft of the text, yet I have first-hand experience of many living people who do none of those things yet still manage to appear in the author lists of many papers…

In future the only mark of recognition allowed on a researcher’s headstone will be their H-index

Finally, let me remark that a researcher’s H-index, a quantity often used by institutions to inform decisions about promotion, also continues to increase after the researcher has kicked the bucket. Why, then, should the dead be barred from promotion? Perhaps there should be a new job category of PHR (PostHumous Researcher)? The departed could even take up senior management positions where they could do just as good a job as those in such positions already without incurring any salary costs. This approach could address many of the grave problems facing modern universities.

It is high time institutions adopted a much more inclusive approach to their late researchers who, instead of merely pushing up the daises, could be used to push up the citations.

The Escape Ladder – Joan Miró

Posted in Art with tags , , , on April 10, 2024 by telescoper
The Escape Ladder

by Joan Miró (1940, gouache, watercolor, and ink on paper, 38cm × 46 cm, The Museum of Modern Art, New York City )

R.I.P. Peter Higgs (1929-2024)

Posted in Barcelona, Maynooth, R.I.P., The Universe and Stuff with tags , , , , , on April 9, 2024 by telescoper

I was very sad this afternoon to hear of the death of theoretical physicist Peter Higgs, on Monday 8th April 2024, at the age of 94. I never met Peter Higgs but I know how greatly liked and respected he was (see, e.g. here) and that he leaves an important legacy as a physicist, particularly the work that led to the award of the 2013 Nobel Prize for Physics (jointly with François Englert) . Condolences to his family, friends and colleagues.

You can read the very nice Guardian obituary here; there are many others published in media from elsewhere in the world (including Ireland and Barcelona).

I’ll add two extremely slight connections. One is that Peter Higgs visited Maynooth University in 2012, not long before his Nobel Prize was announced. The other is that he was born in the Elswick area of Newcastle upon Tyne, not far from Benwell, where I grew up.

The Gates Foundation and Open Access

Posted in Open Access with tags , , , , , on April 9, 2024 by telescoper

There has been quite a lot of reaction (e.g. here) to the recent announcement of a new Open Access Policy by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, which is one of the one of the world’s top funders of biomedical research. This mandates the distribution of research it funds as preprints and also states that it will not pay Article Processing Charges (APCs). The essentials of the policy, which comes into effect on 1st January 2025, are these:

  1. Funded Manuscripts Will Be Available. As soon as possible and to the extent feasible, Funded Manuscripts shall be published as a preprint in a preprint server recognized by the foundation or preapproved preprint server which applies a sufficient level of scrutiny to submissions. Accepted articles shall be deposited immediately upon publication in PubMed Central (PMC), or in another openly accessible repository, with proper metadata tagging identifying Gates funding. In addition, grantees shall disseminate Funded Manuscripts as described in their funding agreements with the foundation, including as described in any proposal or Global Access commitments.
  2. Dissemination of Funded Manuscripts Will Be On “Open Access” Terms. All Funded Manuscripts, including any subsequent updates to key conclusions, shall be available immediately, without any embargo, under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0) or an equivalent license. This will permit all users to copy, redistribute, transform, and build on the material in any medium or format for any purpose (including commercial) without further permission or fees being required.
  3. Gates Grantees Will Retain Copyright. Grantees shall retain sufficient copyright in Funded Manuscripts to ensure such Funded Manuscripts are deposited into an open-access repository and published under the CC-BY 4.0 or equivalent license.
  4. Underlying Data Will Be Accessible Immediately. The Foundation requires that underlying data supporting the Funded Manuscripts shall be made accessible immediately and as open as possible upon availability of the Funded Manuscripts, subject to any applicable ethical, legal, or regulatory requirements or restrictions. All Funded Manuscripts must be accompanied by an Underlying Data Availability Statement that describes where any primary data, associated metadata, original software, and any additional relevant materials or information necessary to understand, assess, and replicate the Funded Manuscripts findings in totality can be found. Grantees are encouraged to adhere to the FAIR principles to improve the findability, accessibility, interoperability, and reuse of digital assets.
  5. The Foundation Will Not Pay Article Processing Charges (APC). Any publication fees are the responsibility of the grantees and their co-authors.
  6. Compliance Is A Requirement of Funding. This Open Access policy applies to all Funded Manuscripts, whether the funding is in whole or in part. Compliance will be continuously reviewed, and grantees and authors will be contacted when they are non-compliant.
    • As appropriate, Grantees should include the following acknowledgment and notice in Funded Manuscripts:
    • “This work was supported, in whole or in part, by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation [Grant number]. The conclusions and opinions expressed in this work are those of the author(s) alone and shall not be attributed to the Foundation. Under the grant conditions of the Foundation, a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License has already been assigned to the Author Accepted Manuscript version that might arise from this submission. Please note works submitted as a preprint have not undergone a peer review process.”

Reactions to this new policy are generally positive, except (unsurprisingly) for the academic publishing industry.

For what it’s worth, my view is that it is a good policy, and I wish more funders went along this route, but it falls short of being truly excellent. As it stands, the policy seems to encourage authors to put the “final” version of their articles in traditional journals, without these articles being freely available through Open Access. That falls short of goal establishing a global worldwide network of institutional and/or subject-based repositories, linked to peer review mechanisms such as overlays, that share research literature freely for the common good. To help achieve that aim, the Gates’ Foundation should to encourage overlays rather than traditional journals as the way to carry out peer review. Perhaps this will be the next step?

Presentation of the BAO DESI results at ICCUB Uni Barcelona – by Licia Verde & Héctor Gil Marin

Posted in The Universe and Stuff with tags , , , , on April 8, 2024 by telescoper

Last week, when I wrote about the new results from the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument (DESI) I mentioned that there would be a seminar here at ICCUB about that very topic. Well, the seminar, by Licia Verde & Héctor Gil Marin, was recorded and here it is:

Enjoy the Eclipse, but watch out for the cosmologists and druids!

Posted in Biographical, The Universe and Stuff with tags , , , , , on April 7, 2024 by telescoper

Ahead of tomorrow’s total eclipse of the Sun visible from a large part of the USA, I can’t resist sharing this excerpt from The Times warning about the consequences of a mass influx of people to Cornwall for the total eclipse of the Sun that was visible on August 11th 1999, almost 25 years ago. No doubt there are similar things going around about tomorrow’s eclipse:

I did write a letter to the Times complaining that, as a cosmologist, I felt this was very insulting… to druids. They didn’t publish it.

Anyway, I did get to see the total solar eclipse of 1999, not from Cornwall (where it was overcast and rainy) but from the island of Alderney (one of the Channel Islands). There was quite a lot of cloud cover in the morning of the big event so I was expecting to be disappointed. Indeed, the very start of the eclipse was hidden by cloud and there were groans from the large crowd assembled to watch it. A few seconds later, however, the clouds parted and we got a wonderful view. I remember very well that it seemed to get much colder during totality and an eery wind started to blow. Another thing is that all the birds thought it was night already and started to roost, although it was only around 11am.

You might think astronomers would be a bit indifferent to eclipses because they are well understood and totally predictable. But to experience an eclipse in person has a very powerful effect (or did on me anyway). We may be scientists but we don’t respond entirely rationally to everything. Nor should we.

Here’s a (not very good) scan of a (slightly damaged) picture from that eclipse:

Anyway, tomorrow (i.e. 8th April 2024) the total solar eclipse crosses North America with parts of 15 states able to view it: the eclipse will first appear along Mexico’s Pacific Coast at around 11:07 a.m. PDT, then travel across a swath of the U.S., from Texas to Maine, and into Canada. About 31.6 million people live in the path of totality. The path will range between 108 and 122 miles wide. An additional 150 million people live within 200 miles of the path of totality.

Do make the effort to see it if you can. It’s a remarkable experience that will live long in your memory. But watch out for the cosmologists and druids!

Five New Publications at the Open Journal of Astrophysics

Posted in OJAp Papers, Open Access, The Universe and Stuff with tags , , , , , , , , , on April 6, 2024 by telescoper

As promised a couple of days ago, I am taking the opportunity today to announce the batch of papers at the Open Journal of Astrophysics that were paused slightly while we updated our system. This batch includes five papers, which I now present to you here. These five take the count in Volume 7 (2024) up to 25 and the total published by OJAp up to 140. We’re publishing roughly two papers a week these days so we expect publish about 100 this year.

In chronological order, the five papers, with their overlays, are as follows. You can click on the images of the overlays to make them larger should you wish to do so.

This paper, by Yingtian Chen and Oleg Gnedin of the University of Michigan, is the 21st paper to be published in Volume 7 and the 136th altogether. It is a study of kinematic, chemical and age data of globular clusters from Gaia yielding clues to how the Milky Way Galaxy assembled. Here’s a screenshot of the overlay which includes the abstract. Note the new-style DOI at the bottom left.

You can read the article on arXiv directly here. This paper has a publication date of 20th March 2024, and is in the folder marked Astrophysics of Galaxies.

The second paper is “Generation of realistic input parameters for simulating atmospheric point-spread functions at astronomical observatories” by Claire-Alice Hébert (Stanford), Joshua E. Meyers (Stanford), My H. Do (Cal. State U, Pomona), Patricia R. Burchat (Stanford) and the LSST Dark Energy Science Collaboration. It explores the use of atmospheric modelling to generate realistic estimates of the point-spread function for observational work, especially for the Vera C. Rubin Observatory. This one is in the folder marked Instrumentation and Methods for Astrophysics and was published on 4th April 2024. Here is a screen grab of the overlay which includes the abstract:

 

You can find the officially accepted version of the paper on the arXiv here.

The third paper to announce is “Cosmic Dragons: A Two-Component Mixture Model of COSMOS Galaxies” by William K. Black and August E. Evrard of the University of Michigan (Ann Arbor, USA). This paper was also published on 4th April 2024,  is in the folder Astrophysics of Galaxies and you can see the overlay here:

 

The accepted version of this paper can be found on the arXiv here.

The next paper is “High mass function ellipsoidal variables in the Gaia Focused Product Release: searching for black hole candidates in the binary zoo” by Dominick M. Rowan, Todd A. Thompson,
Tharindu Jayasinghe, Christopher S. Kochanek and Krzysztof Z. Stanek of Ohio State University (USA). This paper, in the Solar and Stellar Astrophysics collection, describes a search for massive unseen stellar companions variable star systems found in Gaia data. This one was also published on 4th April 2024.

Here is the overlay:

 

 

You can find the full text for this one on the arXiv here.

Last in this batch, but by no means least, published yesterday (5th April 2024), we have a paper “Machine Learning the Dark Matter Halo Mass of Milky Way-Like Systems” by Elaheh Hayati & Peter Behroozi (University of Arizona, USA) and Ekta Patel (University of Utah, USA).  The primary classification for this one is once again Astrophysics of Galaxies and it presents a method for estimating the mass of a galaxy halo using neural networks that does not assume, for example,  dynamical equilibrium:

 

You can click on the image of the overlay to make it larger should you wish to do so. You can find the officially accepted version of the paper on the arXiv here.

As you can see this is quite a diverse collection of papers. Given the increase in submissions in the area of galactic astrophysics we are very happy to welcome another expert in that area to our Editorial Board, in the form of Professor Walter Dehnen of the University of Heidelberg.

Cosmology Talks: Cosmological Constraints from BAO

Posted in The Universe and Stuff, YouTube with tags , , , , , , , , , on April 5, 2024 by telescoper

Here’s another video in the Cosmology Talks series curated by Shaun Hotchkiss. This one very timely after yesterday’s announcement. Here is the description on the YouTube page:

The Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument (DESI) has produced cosmological constraints! And it is living up to its name. Two researchers from DESI, Seshadri Nadathur and Andreu Font-Ribera, tell us about DESI’s measurements of the Baryon Acoustic Oscillations (BAO) released today. These results use one full year of DESI data and are the first cosmological constraints from the telescope that have been released. Mostly, it is what you might expect: tighter constraints. However, in the realm of the equation of state of dark energy, they find, even with BAO alone, that there is a hint of evidence for evolving dark energy. When they combine their data with CMB and Supernovae, who both also find small hints of evolving dark energy on their own, the evidence for dark energy not being a cosmological constant jumps as high as 3.9σ with one combination of the datasets. It seems there still is “concordance cosmology”, it’s just not ΛCDM for these datasets. The fact that all three probes are tentatively favouring this is intriguing, as it makes it unlikely to be due to systematic errors in one measurement pipeline.

My own take is that the results are very interesting but I think we need to know a lot more about possible systematics before jumping to conclusions about time-varying dark energy. Am I getting conservative in my old age? These results from DESI do of course further underline the motivation for Euclid (another Stage IV survey), which may have an even better capability to identify departures from the standard model.

P.S. Here’s a nice graphic showing the cosmic web showing revealed by the DESI survey: