Sir

You report a proposal to ‘return’ the name of the Royal Greenwich Observatory to the National Maritime Museum at Greenwich (Nature 388, 705; 1997). We have no wish to cause offence to our parent organization, but, as with all children leaving home, there can be no going back.

The Royal Observatory moved from Greenwich in the 1950s, leaving behind a historical museum of artefacts which tell the story of UK astronomy from the foundation of the observatory by Charles II in 1675 until the middle of this century.

The Royal Greenwich Observatory at Cambridge in the 1990s is quite different. It is a modern scientific establishment with a first-class international reputation for achievements in astronomical research, telescope and instrument technology and related activities.

In our view it would be an empty gesture to detach and move the name from the observatory and return it to a museum. Furthermore, the business plan that the observatory's ma nagers are developing to keep it going as a nonprofit organization depends crucially on the worldwide reputation that the name Royal Greenwich Observatory carries.

You suggest that the ‘public understanding’ arm of the observatory might accompany the move to the museum. Our highly successful programme in this area could not be continued at a museum, and as members of the team we would not wish to try. It is successful because we not only do research ourselves but have access to experts working at the frontiers of astronomy and astronomical technology.

In his statement, the minister for science, John Battle, instructed the Particle Physics and Astronomy Research Council to “explore every avenue for keeping the institution alive”. This institution is more than just a name that can be moved from one building to another.