Museum Of Science Renovations | 1 Science Park | West End

Equilibria said:
You have your natural history museums, like Chicago's Field Museum or the Smithsonian Natural History Museum in DC, and you have your experiential "science and technology and other cool stuff for kids" museums like the Exploratorium in SF, which sort of invented the concept.
Click to expand...

Although in SF I find the California Academy of Science far more interesting than the Exploratorium, and I'd be more excited to go to the MOS if it were more like the former than the latter. I guess this is in part because the Academy is extremely new after its recent renovation, so maybe the MOS will undergo similar improvements.
 
metasyntactic said:
Although in SF I find the California Academy of Science far more interesting than the Exploratorium, and I'd be more excited to go to the MOS if it were more like the former than the latter. I guess this is in part because the Academy is extremely new after its recent renovation, so maybe the MOS will undergo similar improvements.
Click to expand...

FWIW, the Exploratorium is newer now.
 
Equilibria said:
...and you have your experiential "science and technology and other cool stuff for kids" museums like the Exploratorium in SF, which sort of invented the concept.
Click to expand...

Well -- Not Hardly -- the MOS was doing the kind of stuff that Exploratorium later popularized several decades before there was an Exploratorium

The MoS tries to do both, with an additional edge of nostalgia in exhibits like the Hall of Electricity, Mathemantica, the ship models, the Apollo capsule, etc. Actually, one of the MoS's real strengths is that it attempts to truly be a museum of "science" with hard lab exhibits like the SEM and science classes for kids (a whole part of the museum I only saw when I was in elementary school and will never see again).

That said, Whigh, a lot of the features you're listing there are pretty gray around the edges. The Van de Graaf is timeless, but it's also 80 years old. Mathematica was installed in many science museums around the country, but this has been the only version left for decades. The Omni Theater must be a money maker, I guess, but its technology is obsolete - there's been IMAX theaters in furniture stores for 10 years in Boston - and the movies it shows are pretty boring.
Click to expand...

I would never call a Van de Graaf a piece off nostalgia there are Tandem Van de Graaf generators used for ion implanting in state of the art semiconductors running 24x7 right this very minute. Sure Apollo and even a bit older Mercury is nostalgic -- its part of the march of Human Innovation and already seems quaint -- although the Apollo Guidance Computer in the mid 1960's was the absolute State-of-the_Art in real-time computing and pioneered such concepts as extreme reliability [never was a hardware or software failure in all the missions], when already 10 years old the old gal/guy was repurposed to demonstrate the concept of digital fly by wire

None of that is a fatal flaw. In fact, nostalgia is the only reason I would still go back to the Museum of Science, and all of the exhibits I loved as a kid were multiple generations old THEN. I bet kids today have the exact same connection to the place. The fact that it's getting scraggly is a good reason to give it a freshening, and that's exactly what this project is doing without cutting anything beloved.
Click to expand...

You need only remember two things that you should have learned at the MOS:
Nothing is constant except for change
Nature is a really big old lab -- Nature probably has already done what we are trying to do
 
BussesAin'tTrains said:
Mathematica is on its way out. As for scraggliness and nostalgia, go back to the museum in three or four years and I promise you it won't be the same place you went to as a kid.
Click to expand...
I hope they just renovate Mathematica...all it really needs is for the timeline to be extended about 100 years to the right (40 since it was made, with 60 more for future expansion). That, and all else I'd change is:

- Carpets and walls
- LED lighting
- A better motor in the Mobius strip (quieter and able to go around "all day")

Mathematica is a classic: Designed by Charles and Ray Eames for IBM and featured at the 1964 World's Fair it is pretty darn timeless.

Like Disney's Carousel of Progress (for GE) and It's A Small World, and the Seattle Monorail and Space Needle I find that not only does it work "for itself" but also, with proper curation, as a window into Space Age an era we don't (otherwise) have enough connection with.
 
Arlington said:
I hope they just renovate Mathematica...all it really needs is for the timeline to be extended about 100 years to the right (40 since it was made, with 60 more for future expansion). That, and all else I'd change is:

- Carpets and walls
- LED lighting
- A better motor in the Mobius strip (quieter and able to go around "all day")

Mathematica is a classic: Designed by Charles and Ray Eames for IBM and featured at the 1964 World's Fair it is pretty darn timeless.

Like Disney's Carousel of Progress (for GE) and It's A Small World, and the Seattle Monorail and Space Needle I find that not only does it work "for itself" but also, with proper curation, as a window into Space Age an era we don't (otherwise) have enough connection with.
Click to expand...

Arlington -- you might not like this BUT --- Mathematica is going away in its current incarnation --- the current thinking is that What is Technology / What is Engineering is going to center on the current footprint of Mathematica
 
found5dollar said:
Nooooooo.... they can't get rid of mathmatica!
Click to expand...

I'm legitimately curious about what makes an exhibit truly "timeless", i.e. as nostalgic for kids who first saw it in 1965 as those who first saw it in 1995. I literally slept in Mathematica once with the Cub Scouts (and in the wave tank room - both had interesting ambient noise), and frankly I think it fits the bill. I didn't care that it was from the '60s, it feels as "old" to me in the same way anything that's been around my whole life is "old". It's a personal frame of reference, not an absolute one.

There's a big difference between a "timeless" thing which feels new to each generation and an "old" thing that's nostalgic only to those who saw it when it was new. I mean, I'm nostalgic for the giant computer climbing structure at the Computer Museum (and frankly for the Computer Museum in general), but that doesn't mean there's a single thing timeless about it. Heck, even the computer exhibit at MoS now feels pretty obsolete. It's been fifteen years since kids have had to go to a museum to play with computers.

I would encourage MoS not to screw up their timeless stuff while dumping the simply "old". Successful museums typically don't only consist of new things, and it's much more expensive to constantly have to update obsolete "cutting-edge" exhibits.
 
well I go everyone once and a while just to see the "lightning". And Mt Everest. And that large globe... Some aspects do seem a bit old, but then maybe that's because some of it (mathematica?) has been there for as long as I can remember.
They also have some decent lectures, if you look at the monthly schedules they send out.
 
^ Their programs are great, for both kids and adults. They get some BIG scientific names coming for talks too.
 
Equilibria said:
I'm legitimately curious about what makes an exhibit truly "timeless", i.e. as nostalgic for kids who first saw it in 1965 as those who first saw it in 1995. I literally slept in Mathematica once with the Cub Scouts (and in the wave tank room - both had interesting ambient noise), and frankly I think it fits the bill. I didn't care that it was from the '60s, it feels as "old" to me in the same way anything that's been around my whole life is "old". It's a personal frame of reference, not an absolute one.

There's a big difference between a "timeless" thing which feels new to each generation and an "old" thing that's nostalgic only to those who saw it when it was new. I mean, I'm nostalgic for the giant computer climbing structure at the Computer Museum (and frankly for the Computer Museum in general), but that doesn't mean there's a single thing timeless about it. Heck, even the computer exhibit at MoS now feels pretty obsolete. It's been fifteen years since kids have had to go to a museum to play with computers.

I would encourage MoS not to screw up their timeless stuff while dumping the simply "old". Successful museums typically don't only consist of new things, and it's much more expensive to constantly have to update obsolete "cutting-edge" exhibits.
Click to expand...

Equilib -- I think you are close to getting it .....

The MOS is globally recognized for the unique mix of:

1) traditional 19th Century type collecting and early 20th Century model making
2) up-to-the-minute interactive displays of the newest concepts
3) unique slices of technology and nature
4) iconic unique working science and technology such as the SEM and Van de Graaff

The keys is that this has all naturally evolved over the past 150+ years and most particularly in its modern incarnation at Science Park

In my experience I can identify several distinct eras both of building and exhibit making:

The early Post WWII Science Park era of the Planetarium, ships Bridge and small models of steam engines and simple machines [ still existing]

Expansion in the East Wing with the New England Life Zones, recreating "Bell's Telephone Lab" cutaway moving V-8 engine, Light house Fresnel Lens, cutaways of Jet Engines, Atomic Pile with radioactive sources [natural and man-made]

The West Wing -- Mathematica is born -- Theatre of Electricity goes Live -- working Steam Engine; Big Dig [still a bit left]

Red wing arrives -- Mugar Omni, New Lobby, New Traveling Exhibit Gallery -- Planetarium Theatre and lobby re-do

Today everything has to be relevant to everyday life -- we celebrate diversity -- we've done away with "right answers" focusing on process and everything is Green [e.g. waterless urinals]

After the bulk of the $200 M is spent mostly within the existing footprint -- the MOS will still be here -- but it will be once again be renewed and re-purposed into the Natural -- featuring the 'Hall of Human Life", Charles [New Lobby] and Built -- featuring [What is Engineering and Technology] -- and perhaps unfortunately -- some of today's old favorites will disappear in the dust of history
 
For those of you who are fans of Mathematica

It is closing for good in January although aspects and elements will return in some unspecified form at some unspecified time.

In the mean time major interior work will redo the entry area adding a large set of restroom facilities on the way to the Parking Garage and replacing the box office and information complex

Some work will be done immediately on a temporary basis to allow the construction of the 3 story Yawkee Charles River Gallery

Later -- The Blue Wing will be reurposed and restructured into the Built Environment.

It centerpiece will be a major new Thematic Exhibit -- working title "What is Technology" -- in the earliest planning stages right now -- looking for some additional $ to be raised

Built World serious Construction is also subject to the removal of temporary box office and information spaces when the reconstruction to the lobby area and the Yawkee Charles River Gallery are completed [circa early 2016]

Stay tuned for more details
 
^ Such a shame. It is far and away my favorite exhibit.
 
Is this the last remaining installation of Mathematica? There at least used to be several different copies of it in different museums, including the Chicago Museum of Science and Industry (where I first encountered it as a kid).
 
Time to revisit the MOS

The first tangible manifestation of the Yawkee Charles River Gallery has been installed the great glass wall of the lobby in now outfitted with glass whose transparency is tunable

"When the Yawkey Gallery is unveiled in late 2015, Museum guests will immediately be drawn to dynamic video displays on the bridge overhead presenting evocative images of nature, science, and technology. The gallery will be a place of discovery with fish and animal habitats; plant exhibits; water features; interactive maps and learning tools; new LED screens; energy-efficient, electronically tintable glass windows; and access to an outdoor garden space, offering the Museum's first indoor-outdoor educational experience. Visitors will be able to see, touch, and experience the natural and engineered elements that have emerged in the river and environs."

More changes to come in the next few months

http://www.mos.org/sites/dev-elvis....allery on the Charles River press release.pdf
 
Museum of Science-subpar for Boston (?)

Sorry, don't mean to be negative here, but Boston's Museum of Science was in the news recently, which got a few of my friends discussing what they see as a sub-par facility, given our area's rich heritage of higher learning, it seems inadequate. Seriously, the place has needed updating for a long time. Student visitors are expected, but without the busloads of kids, would anyone else even bother to visit the place? :rolleyes:
 
Re: Museum of Science-subpar for Boston (?)

lapradetom said:
Sorry, don't mean to be negative here, but Boston's Museum of Science was in the news recently, which got a few of my friends discussing what they see as a sub-par facility, given our area's rich heritage of higher learning, it seems inadequate. Seriously, the place has needed updating for a long time. Student visitors are expected, but without the busloads of kids, would anyone else even bother to visit the place? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

It's packed with non-students all the time... not sure what data you're basing this on. It's not subpar for all of the tourists who visit it.

A lot of its galleries are outdated yes, but they're also constantly cycling exhibits in and out. Also, where is all the money coming from to update it? MOS isn't very high in the non-profit hierarchy.

I guess I'd like to hear more specifics from you, rather than a general "it seems inadequate"...
 
Re: Museum of Science-subpar for Boston (?)

I went to the Museum of Science a bunch as a kid and eventually volunteered there in High School so I may be biased, but MoS is really good and has a lot of character? I mean, it would be nice for it to be bigger and better but as it is now I don't think it's embarrassing or reflecting poorly on Boston...

Also, don't see how the museum is supposed to expand on their tiny little plot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top