Stars, in your multitudes, scarce to be counted...

[firstfrost]

I went out with mjperson to his observatory this evening, while he got stuff ready for classes and I ogled the telescopes and the tool board. I recently wrote about being back in the basement of Hayden, surrounded by all the accumulated weight of knowledge - this was just the opposite end, where it all shows up, pulled down out of the sky on tiny threads of light, to be hammered into data and distilled into knowledge.

Astronomy seems to me like the dramatic ideal of a science. Science always about looking at something and wondering what, why, how? But most of the things I look at are prosaic. I can look at my arm and wonder about biology, but I don't often. I don't really look at anything and wonder about subatomic physics. But looking up at the stars and the night - it's almost the definition of Mysterious and Unknown. At home, inside, in the light, it's easy to not particularly care about what is out there in the dark, and I admit, I usually don't. But in the night, looking up, it's impossible for me to not wonder.

Comments

[kirisutogomen.livejournal.com]

I'd certainly say that it's close to being the dramatic ideal for a non-experimental science. I'm not sure what I would nominate for the title in the experimental science category. Maybe chemistry, with all the flasks and burners and deadly acids and exploding whatnot?

[firstfrost.livejournal.com]

Chemistry is classic, yeah. Particle colliders are also pretty dramatic, though I don't know how visible it is.

[twe.livejournal.com]

Once in a while I get out to where my Dad's family is from, and am reminded that there are stars in the sky. Lots and lots. In Boston, I mostly see just the sun and the moon. (Though that could also be because these days I've usually driving, rather than walking after dark.)