Max Planck Institute for Astronomy - Annual Report 2005

142 V. People and Events
against space astronomy. But I expect the competition
between the two kinds of observation to get increasingly
tougher in the future and thus the price-performance ratio
of investment and operation to play a very important
role. So in view of the technical developments I think
that earthbound astronomy has advantages.
Are there also any risks?
HFW: Of course there is always a certain risk that
the administration of the Max Planck Society (MPG)
might not realize clearly the educational and discovery
potential of astrophysical research. So there is a danger
that two or several of the astrophysically oriented MPIs
will be combined one day. I would consider that a big
mistake because the other MPIs in Bonn, Garching,
and Katlenburg-Lindau are also excellent and complement
one another perfectly. Fortunately, the General
Administration of the MPG is represented in the Board
of Trustees by very high-ranking representatives so that
such problems can be discussed there without reservation.
I also would be very pleased if the boards of trustees
of these institutes would coordinate more closely with
one another.
In the long term, do you think the survival of the
MPIA to be endangered?
HFW: Definitely not. The Institute has a great potential
which it has to use to its full advantage. The MPIs
also live on their ability to undergo continuous change.
Abb. V.14.2: Having a conversation: Jakob Staude (left) and
Hermann-Friedrich Wagner.
Stagnation means scientific death. But I see an incredible
dynamic force being present at the MPIA. And – as
I said before – a third, hopefully female director could
give this dynamic force yet another boost.
You are Chair of the Global Science Forum of the
OECD in Paris, which among other things is striving for
a coordination and cooperation in space- and earthbound
astronomy. Can you briefly describe these problems?
HFW: Space telescopes undoubtedly are justified in certain
fields. But the activities in space and on the ground
have to be better coordinated. I don't believe that eso
and esa can continue to coexist without making arrangements
with one another. But this is only my personal
opinion. »Space astronomers« apparently are not very
much interested in a coordination, as esa and nasa did
not participate in the Astro-Workshops 2003/2004 of the
Global Science Forum where a kind of roadmap over the
next 20 years for the large-scale instruments for astronomy
was worked out. A similar activity in high-energy
physics, in contrast, greatly influenced in 2004 the start
of the worldwide work on the Linear Collider.
A group of German astrophysicists under the leadership
of Günther Hasinger recently wrote an »urgent request«
to the Ministry. The reason for this letter was the
decrease of national funds for extraterrestrial research.
What do you think about this?
HFW: I fully agree with Mr. Hasinger. Germany is the
largest contributor to esa and thus financing a considerable
part of the European projects. At the same time,
however, our researchers don’t have the national means
to participate in these projects with instruments, for ex-