SL’s Pre-interview
JW: What ever date is, can’t say..
SL: Ahh, okay.
JW: Okay. There is your.. Your actual answers, then I have a copy here, that I’ve written questions on.. I don’t have questions about everything.
SL: Okay.
JW: Okay. Let’s see. First, “In your view, what is astronomy and how is it different from other sciences.” Like, say, biology, physics, what ever. You said something about exact answers… let me read that. “It is different from other sciences because it is difficult to determine exact answers. Distances, mass, force, etc.”
SL: Right.
JW: I just want kinds clarification on what you mean by “Exact answers.” How exact?
SL: Okay, I guess because some of the things that you are looking at are so far away, we don’t have instruments that can measure precisely that far away. Like, if it’s something maybe in physics, measure the distance in millimeters, we can measure it fairly accurately, but I think that precision is off when you are talking about something so far away.
JW: Okay, so, astronomy precision..
SL: It’s a lot of inferences.
JW: is off.
SL: Yeah, it seems to be a lot of inferences, because we know that magnitude is 6, that one looks like that, so it must be around 6, you know? I don’t think it as precise as some sciences.
JW: Okay. That’s what I wanted to find out, what you meant, because I understood the rest of it, and I though I understood that, but, I don’t want to misrepresent you.
SL: okay.
JW: Okay. Number two, “ What does a star look like? How certain are astronomers about the structure of stars.” You used the term ‘microscope’, was that just …
SL: Ah. .that’s an oops.
JW: That’s what I thought, and I will change it to ‘telescope.’ When I write it.
SL: okay, yup. You know, it’s funny, I do that a lot. You know, I think scope, and ..
JW: <laugh> Yeah, well ,I wanted to just be sure that, maybe, for some reason, she just doesn’t know the difference. I just needed to make sure. But, no, I didn’t think so. Okay, I still have some other questions. So, you said “Ball of gas.”
SL: Uh-huh.
JW: No outer border.
SL: Does not have a definite outer border. Because it’s a gas that expands and contracts, and you know.
JW: Is this a, is this what you think stars actually look like in the telescope? Or is this what astronomers think stars look like?
SL: Uhhm..
JW: I guess what I’m asking you, when you look at a star in a telescope, as you were
thinking at the time that you wrote this, do they have size to them, do they look like a ball?
SL: They look like a ball. To me, they look round, I’d say they have shape. Do they have size?
JW: they look round, and have a shape.. which is?
SL: Well, spherical. I mean , that’s what it looks.
JW: Okay, so they have a shape.
SL: Because you can’t get close enough to see. I think that if you got right next to it, it would definitely look more, ahh, it’d look more like things radiating outward. From this distance, it looks like a sphere, with an outer border, but, if I were ten feet away, you would not see an outer border.
JW: Okay. You couldn’t tell when you were on the surface.
SL: Right.
JW: Okay. So, in the telescope, they do have some size to them, and a round shape.
SL: Yes.
JW: Inferring that they are spherical from that, or telling that they are spherical from that? Can you see it?
SL: umm. It depends on what you think is spherical.. anything rounded to me… You can tell it is spherical. <pause> Okay.
JW: <possibly holding up an object>You point that strait on and it’s round, but it’s not sphericle.
SL: Ah, okay.
JW: I’m just trying to clarify what you were thinking here. I shouldn’t be teaching, I just prompted you and I shouldn’t have done that. Okay. “So, do you think astronomers see a ball of gas of some size when they view a star,” that was my question, and you basically have said yes.
SL: right.
JW: Okay. That’s fine. “Okay, some astronomers believe the universe will expand forever. Others believe that it will stop expanding and start contracting. Others believe that it will stop, but not contract.” I need further explanation on what you were saying. Let me read this. “All of these theories are possible, because there is really no way to fully understand the expansion and contraction of the universe because of the vast distance of matter, and because of the fact that what is way out there is really in the past”
SL: Well, I just think.. This is an area that I was kind of vague in that we covered at the end of the 1020. I thought that it was kind of difficult to understand this part of it. What I remember in the lecturing was that some people believe one, some people believe the other, and they all have their own, what they would call proof, but, some people.. It is the same thing as looking at a medical study. I can interpret one way, and somebody else can interpret another way, and say , “There is my proof.” I think it is the same thing, people find the proof, they need to substantiate what they believe, but somebody else can find proof that substantiates what they believe.
JW: Ah, okay. You didn’t really say that here, but, that’s what I wanted to find out.
SL: Yes, yeah.
JW: And, distance, you said, “Distance of matter, the fact that it is way out there, It’s really in the past.”
SL: Yeah, because what you are looking at isn’t now, it’s before. And I think that is confusing to then generalize what will happen in the future.
JW: Okay.
SL: You don’t really know what’s happening now, you know what is happening from before, and if you just extrapolate, and assume what happened from before is continuing, okay, but I don’t think you can necessarily do that. Because you don’t know that there won’t be a change that you haven’t seen yet. I think it’s one of those philosophical things.
JW: So, you are saying that you really cannot extrapolate from the past to the future.
SL: No, not to me you can’t, because you don’t know that something didn’t happen that you haven’t seen yet.
JW: Okay. Number 4, “Does the development of scientific knowledge, including astronomy, require experiments. “ You said, “Yes, in a general manner, it doesn’t always require experiments using scales, test tubes, telescopes. Sometimes it involves numerous calculations and manipulations of other’s data and conclusions.”
SL: okay.
JW: Can you give me an example of an astronomical experiement?
SL: an astronomical experiment? Uhhmm.. <pause> Okay. That’s why was kind of yes, and kind of no,
JW: So ,this was a yes with a question mark behind it?
SL: Yes. It depends if you call an experiment something which you have to take calculations and measure something, versus an experiment that you take what somebody else did and manipulate the data. You know, it’s not an experiment, it’s maybe a mathematical experiment. You know?
JW: Okay, a methodic experiment.
SL: Yeah, it depends what you cal an experiment. If I were a chemistry major, an experiment to me is mixing chemicles and seeing what happens, it’s physically doing something. Whereas in astronomy, and experiment could manipulating people’s data and coming up with a new way of doing something. So, you are not necessarily doing your own initial measuremnt, your…
JW: Manipulating some one else’s data?
SL: Yeah. So that’s what I’m saying, so to me, If you have something that required experiments , and you look at the term experiments like I am, I don’t look at the term experiment as you having to mix two things or , you know?
JW: Would you call going out and looking through a telescope at the sky to observe, binary stars, an experiment?
SL: No. I think an experiment is something that you are looking for a way to find an answer to something Going out with a different.. If I wasn’t just going out to look, if I was going out to look and decide if that star looks like it’s in a different part of the sky today than it was yesterday, to me that would be an experiment, because I’m trying to find an answer to something.
JW: Okay. D oyou have to have, like, controls, variables, in doing an experiment? And what controls and variables would be in ..?
SL: Yes, in some way, yes. Uhm, a control, might be the chart that says where the star should be in the summer.
JW: And now you go look and see that it is not there.
SL: Right.
JW: Your saying the chart was your control, to tell you weather something had changed or not.
SL: Yes.
JW: Okay, number 5. “What activities do astronomers do to learn about the universe?” You said, “astronomers use spectroscopy …”
SL: Microscopes again.. <laughing> Aahhh.
JW: Yes, you were very consistant, I underlined that.
SL: isn’t that funny? I don’t know why… I’m a typical.. more biology major.
JW: That’s why we are having this little interview, to make sure I don’t say that and make some conclusion about something that you had no real intentions of saying.
SL: right.
JW: Okay, you sound like astronomers use spectroscopy only. That’s all you really talk about. “Absorption emmision line determine composition. They use extremely powerful telescopes to determine the shape and structure. Telescope result can be also used with other mathematical techniques.” Uhuh.
SL: That’s looking at how they use parallax to measure the distance…
JW: I’m curious who your 7010 or 7020 professor was.
SL:W—Why, did I have a big mistake?
JW: No, I was just because certain of us.. I tend not to emphasize spectroscopy as much as others, because I don’t do spectroscopy as much as others. I do photometric measurements and position stuff.
SL: Oh, oaky.
JW: So, if you’d have had D— or W--- you get more in the way of spectroscopy.
SL: Aaah, okay.
JW: And that’s why, more for my own curiousity.. You must have had somebody who does spectroscopy, because you seem to stress that right away, and then you kinda went off to some other things. To me, it led me to think that “she thinks of spectroscopy a lot. Somebody used it, and used it over and over and over again”
SL: Yeah, I felt like we talked about it a lot, and in the lab we also did a lot with the absorption lines, and stuff like that. I thinkthat, and I actually felt that some of it was kinda confusing, like, absorption versus emission.. So ,it was probably something that I needed to study more ,to make sure I understood, so probably got stuck in my had.
JW: that’s fine, I was just curious about that. Okay, number 6. “What astronomers choose to study ,and how they learn about the universe may be influenced by a variety of factors.” And your statements here, I don’t have anything to ask about that. I have nothing to say here, unless you have something to talk about.
SL: No, I still feel pretty much the same. I think sometimes, especially when I talk to some of the graduate students, some them are brought here to look at a certain thing that the university does. So, your kind of, you know..
JW: Okay. “Write a definition for a scientific astronomical observation.” You’ve already just told me a few minutes ago what wasn’t an scientific way at looking. “Scientific observation is the observing of astronomical phenomena discovered during a scientific inquiry.”
SL: Yeah, that’s what I’m saying, if you are looking for an answer to a question and you find some astronomical..
JW: must be.. looking to answer a question?
SL: Yeah. Because it’s funny, because now I read this, and I’m not sure I would agree with what I say.
JW: that’s okay, we’ll get to that in another interview, because there is gonna be a second one?
SL: Yeah, I don’t know.
JW: And at that point I’m gonna send you these questions, so you can do it at your own time. This was just the initial. Anyway. “Give an example of something you have done or heard about in astronomy that illustrates you definition.” You said, “see a comet across the night sky while stargazing.”
SL: Yeah, that goes along more with what I would say now. A scientific astronomical observation would be observing something that has to do with astronomy.
JW: Describe what a comet looks like.
SL: A comet?
JW: Yeah, in the sky, what does a comet look like.
SL: I guess, something going quickly across the sky that looks like something is trailing it.
JW: Okay.
SL: And then it kinds disappears.
JW: So, it lasts for a few seconds, a few minutes..
SL: Yeah, seconds.
JW: Seconds, okay.
SL: Yeah, and the bottom part, I guess I was interpreting this as when in my science class he said “Go out and look at the stars.”
JW: Uh-huh.
SL: Like, observation of the universe I saw during a scientific assignment. During, like Dr. W, telling me to go out and look at the sky.
JW: Okay, so if I were to tell you to go out and find Orion, the constellation Orion, would that make it a scientific observation? Because you were assigned to go do it?
SL: That’s a tough one, because it’s definately an astronomical observation.
JW: Yes, it is an astronomical observation.
SL: Whether it is a scientific astronomical observation. I would say no. When I’m reading this now.
JW: But did you think that then? Could I say that student D, or what ever name you are going to have, thought that if you were assigned to go out and make an observation, such as finding a constellation, that that was constituting scientific ob..
SL: Yes, yes.
JW: Okay, so, finding a constellation is a scientific astronomical observation. That’s fair to say?
SL: Yeah, yeah.
JW: Okay. If your gonna change your mind on that fine. That’s what I wanted to find out about.
SL: Okay.
JW: Okay. “an astronomer notices with their unaided eye that they can see more blue stars than red stars.” They do the same thing with a telescope. “Do you consider this investigation to be scientific? Explain why or why not.” You said, “No.” Thinking back to what at that time you were thinking, “It involved only one aspect of an inquiry, visual.”
SL: Okay.<reading paper> <pause> Uhhmm… <pause> I guess I was interpreting this question as almost like saying, Do you consider this persons investigation to be almost like a valid scientific investigation. And the reason I said no, because you can’t just look at one thing, an make an assumption.
JW: Oh, you were thinking… valid.
SL: Yeah.
JW:..scientific.. So <pause>
SL: Almost, like you could call it scientific because it deals with a science, but that’s not a valid scientific explanation that he had here, because he only looked at one thing.
JW: okay, so you are saying the conclusion..was not valid? Or validated?
SL: Umhh. Validated. By just looking..
JW: So, what would you have to do to validate it? I mean, he looked twice, once with his two eyes, and once with a telescope, and got the same result.
SL: Well ,you can’t see everything that’s out there, so, just saying “In what I can see , there must be more blue than red.” You can’t see to the depth of how far it goes back.
JW: so, conclusion is certainly not valid, is what you are saying.
SL: Yes.
JW: And that’s why you say the investigation was not scientific.
SL: yeah, exactally, because the conclusion was not..
JW: Okay. “If you do not think their work was scientific, how would you change the investigation to be scientific?” “Look at it in other ways.” Okay. ‘So what other ways?’ is what I’ve got down here.
SL: What other ways.. Uhmmm.. I guess that’s .. Well ,part of that is the part of astronomy that I think is difficult, because you can’t look at everything everywhere, so I think a lot of it is assumptions. I guess, I guess how else could you decided.. Uhhmm…. <pause> I’m trying to think… well, I guess again I go back to the spectroscopy, you could look at that aspect of what’s out there..
JW: use.. the..
SL: And also use..
JW: Use spectroscopic in addition?
SL: Yes, as well as like Hubble telescopes and stuff like that that can see further than what we can just see here.
JW: Use.. Bigger.. telescopes.
SL: Yeah, bigger and at a distance that can probably tell a little bit more than you can tell
here.
JW: So, you are basically saying to confirm your data with other observations, such as spectroscopy, larger telescopes..
SL: yeah, and more time. You can’t look at one little section of the sky, at one season, you know? I mean, maybe you could make the assumption that during July, from what I can see in Atlanta, it looks there are more blue. <laugh>But that doesn’t mean that in the winter? I think it is a huge assumption, that you can’t make just going out and looking for one day.
JW: Okay. Might have been a bad question on my part, but, I’m not sure of that, either. Okay. “Some people have claimed that all scientific investigations, including astronomy, must follow the same general steps or methods.” What I was referring to here is the scientific method that you will see in any high school or middle school textbook: Step 1, step 2, step 3, step 4, step 5, conclusion.
SL: Okay.
JW: You said, “There are different general methods that scientific investigation can follow. Science is general term, they are not <something> the same.”