At what point can you call yourself an astronomer?

[kdog72]

Is there any official "critieria" that you would go by? What constitutes a "professional astronomer."? I just got my 90mm Mak-Cass scope in (Celestron), a eyepiece for 100X, and when it warms up a bit I plan on taking every opportunity to observe, and also keep a log book. Tonight I did some light observing of Saturn-the first planet I've seen through a scope - awesome! I'm 34 and sound like a little kid don't I! Can't wait to get started!

 

[billslugg]

IF you make your primary living from astronomy, you can call yourself a professional astronomer, and the general public will acknowledge this. IF you want to be acknowledged by the astronomical community as a professional astronomer, you must be making your primary living by astronomy and at least be on track to a Phd. In reality, there is no one who does not have a Phd and is making their living by astronomy. You must be afilliated with a University. In addition, you must be publishing in peer reviewed journals. I have taken college level astronomy courses, I have made observations, I sharpen saws for a living - I am an amateur astronomer. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p> </p> </div>

 

[ascendingsoul]

we must keep interest in the stars mandkind will will evolve spirit and mind and it will be beautiful it is meant to be everything evolves including our spirtits we are all meant to look at the stars becouse in the physical we are all children of star dust and i mean all gods children in the universe nomatter what planet our souls evolve on there are highly advanced spirited beings that have been watching over us since the begining of our time on this planet so astronomer the next time you look to the stars remember there are kindred spirits that love us and want people like you to keep looking and have faith in humanity

 

[kdog72]

I guess I should clarify a bit. I'm not really too concerned about becoming a "professional" astronomer, but at what level could some shlub like me refer to themselves as just plain ol' astronomer? Or even just an "amatuer" astronomer?

 

[MeteorWayne]

Well if you go out with your scope, and keep a journal of your obserations, in my book, that's an amateur astronomer!! <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>

 

[erioladastra]

"In reality, there is no one who does not have a Phd and is making their living by astronomy. You must be afilliated with a University. In addition, you must be publishing in peer reviewed journals."<br /><br />Not true at all!!! You can make your life via astronomy and not be a PhD and there are many astronomers out there not associated with universities. I think all the many B.S. and M.S. astronomers working at the Space Telescope Science Institute, Jet Propulsion Lab, the many ground based observatories etc would be proof of the first point. The many astronomers employed by companies like Lockheed Martin and NASA would be proof of the second, though I will agree the vast majority are affiliated with universities. You can be an astronomer and control a research telescope or a satelite - not just research and teaching. I also know of several astronomers (one at LockMart) who does research and publishes papers - and do not have a PhD. There is a whole range.

 

[billslugg]

Thank you for clearing this up. I was unaware of that.<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p> </p> </div>

 

[yevaud]

Gotta argue that a bit.<br /><br /><i>In reality, there is no one who does not have a Phd and is making their living by astronomy.</i><br /><br />I can name several hundred, many of whom I went to school with. There are Lab Managers, Curators, CAD/CAM Operators, Electronics Engineers and Technicians. The list is endless.<br /><br />Remember - to use a hospital as an analogy - you are a Health-Care professional if you work in a professional job in the field. Ranging from Lab Techs to Doctors. Hospitals are not all MD's.<br /><br /><i>You must be afilliated with a University.</i><br /><br />Again, not true. I know several (including my former advisor and his favorite PhD candidate) who began a company to manufacture Fabry_Perot instrumentation. They are not affiliated to any academic institution, yet are still professionals within the field.<br /><br /><i>In addition, you must be publishing in peer reviewed journals.</i><br /><br />Generally, only PhD's or candidates do this - within Academia. So insofar as Academia goes, you're correct. To (again) use my ex-advisor as an example, I don't think he's published in years - yet until recently, sat on the steering committee for Arecibo. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Differential Diagnosis:  </em>"<strong><em>I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are</em></strong>."<br /> </p> </div>

 

[billslugg]

Thank you. I understand what you are saying. But a lab tech or an engineer is not a professional astronomer. I was referring to someone who made their living by obtaining grants, requesting telescope time, making observations, and publishing them. Would not someone like that certainly need a Doctorate, be affiliated and have to publish? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p> </p> </div>

 

[yevaud]

No, if the paper has merit and is well laid out, anyone may publish. Of course, it favors PhD's, truly, but not exclusively.<br /><br />Well, yes, true, the particular individual you refer to would almost certainly be a PhD or candidate, and follow that sequence. But remember, there is an entire infrastructure behind those PhD's to allow them to operate, and they are not lightweights.<br /><br />I built part of a satellite at BU. That, as far as I am concerned, made me a professional - for all that I worked for a PhD.<br /><br />What with my work in the school Observatory (as an Undergrad), I probably got more 'scope time than any PhD. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Differential Diagnosis:  </em>"<strong><em>I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are</em></strong>."<br /> </p> </div>

 

[mako71]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p><br />Yevaud: No, if the paper has merit and is well laid out, anyone may publish.<br /><p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />This is true.<br /><br /><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p><br />Yevaud: Of course, it favors PhD's, truly, but not exclusively.<br /><p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />And this is too, unfortunately. During making my MSc Thesis at freetime I have found it very hard to get enough knowledge about the current research on the field (the subject doesn't belong to the regular research projects of the department I'm studying - my "mistake", but I glady took it). So to make a paper, you normally need to have contacts to people on the same field to know what's happening and that's not very easy for amateurs (doing something else as profession).<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p>________________ </p><p>reaaliaika.net </p> </div>

 

[yevaud]

Yes, and the Peer Reviews and Oral Challenges can be identical to being skinned alive and then bathed in vinegar. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Differential Diagnosis:  </em>"<strong><em>I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are</em></strong>."<br /> </p> </div>