prepublication copy - The Department of Astronomy & Astrophysics ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

activities 2 that have emerged from the research community. The survey was asked to review the technical readiness of the projects being considered for prioritization, assess various sources of risk, and develop independent estimates of the cost and schedule risks of the activity with help from an independent contractor hired by the National Research Council (NRC), the Aerospace Corporation. There were also instructions to consider and make recommendations relating to the allocation of future budgets and to address choices that may be faced, given a range of budget scenarios—including establishing criteria on which the recommendations depend, and suggesting strategies for the agencies on how to rebalance programs within budgetary scenarios upon failure of one or more of the criteria. STUDY PROCESS AND PARTICIPANTS The committee began its work in the fall of 2008 with preparations for the first plenary meeting of the Astro2010 Survey Committee in December 2008. The first task was to define the tasks for the nine expert panels appointed in early 2009 by the NRC to assist the committee in the execution of its charge. The five Science Frontier Panels (SFPs) defined and articulated the themes for the science case that underpins the survey recommendations. The four Program Prioritization Panels (PPPs) conducted an indepth study of the technical and programmatic issues related to the 100 or so research activities—in total more than ten times the program that could be supported under any credible budget—that the community presented to the survey in the months that followed. The nine appointed panels comprised 123 members drawn from across all of astronomy and astrophysics. In the first phase of the survey, the five SFPs worked to identify science themes that define the research frontiers for the 2010-2020 decade in five areas: Cosmology and Fundamental Physics, the Galactic Neighborhood, Galaxies Across Cosmic Time, Planetary Systems and Star Formation, and Stars and Stellar Evolution. Drawing on the 324 white papers on science opportunities submitted to the NRC in response to an open call from the committee to the astronomy and astrophysics research community, 3 as well as on briefings received from federal agencies that provide support for the field, the SFPs strove to identify the scientific drivers of the field and the most promising opportunities for progress in research in the next decade, taking into consideration those areas where the technical means and the theoretical foundations are in place for major steps forward. The SFPs were instructed to avoid advocacy for prioritization of specific new missions, telescopes, and other research activities. They also worked ahead of and therefore independent of the PPPs. The input of the SFPs to the committee was organized around four science questions ripe for answering and general areas with unusual discovery potential. The SFPs, and especially their chairs, dealt with the considerable challenge of anticipating future scientific developments and making tough choices with careful deliberation and collegiality. In the second phase of the survey, the PPPs were charged to develop a ranked program of research activities in four programmatic areas: Electromagnetic Observations from Space; Optical and Infrared Astronomy from the Ground; Particle Astrophysics and Gravitation; and Radio, Millimeter, and Submillimeter from the Ground. In addition to the draft science questions and discovery areas received from the SFP chairs at a joint meeting held in May 2009, the PPPs also reviewed the more than 100 proposals for research activities presented by the astronomy and astrophysics community for consideration by the survey. 4 In addition the PPPs received briefings from federal agencies, project proponents, and other stakeholders at public sessions held in June 2009 at the summer meeting of the American Astronomical Society in Pasadena, California. In their final assembly of priorities, the PPPs also took into account assessments of cost and schedule risk, and of the technical readiness of the research 2 In this context, “activities” include any project, telescope, facility, mission, or research program of sufficient scope to be identified separately in the committee’s report. The selection of subject matter was guided by the content of these programs. 3 The set of white papers submitted is available at http://sites.nationalacademies.org/BPA/BPA_050603. Accessed May 2010. 4 For more information see http://sites.nationalacademies.org/BPA/BPA_049855. Accessed May 2010. PREPUBLICATION COPY—SUBJECT TO FURTHER EDITORIAL CORRECTION xiv
activities under consideration for prioritization. Each PPP report contains a proposed program of prioritized, balanced, and integrated research activities, reflecting the results of its in-depth study of the technical and programmatic issues and of its consideration of the results of the independent technical evaluation and cost and schedule risk estimate. The committee received draft reports of the PPPs’ input on proposed programs at its fourth committee meeting in October 2009. All four PPPs and especially their chairs dealt with the daunting task of choosing, with objectivity and on the basis of their broad expertise, just a few of so many scientifically exciting and credible proposals in front of them. The reports of the five SFPs and the four PPPs are collected in a separate volume of this survey report. 5 In addition to the nine panels, six Infrastructure Study Groups (ISGs) also provided input for the committee’s consideration. Consisting of 71 volunteer consultants drawn for the most part from the astronomy and astrophysics community, the ISGs gathered and analyzed data on “infrastructural” issues in six areas—Computation, Simulation, and Data Handling (including archiving of astronomical data); Demographics (encompassing astronomers and astrophysicists working in different environments and subfields); Facilities, Funding, and Programs (including infrastructure issues such as support for laboratory astrophysics and technology development and theory); International and Private Partnerships; Education and Public Outreach; and Astronomy and Public Policy (focusing on benefits to the nation that accrue from federal investment in astronomy and the potential contributions that professional astronomers make to research of societal importance, and mechanisms by which the astronomy community provides advice to the federal government)—to describe recent trends and past quantifiable impacts on research programs in astronomy and astrophysics. The ISGs provided preliminary reports to the committee and the PPPs at the May 2009 meeting, and their final internal reports were made available to the committee in the fall of 2009 and are the basis for the charts and tables presented in Appendix B of the panel reports volume of this survey report. The five SFPs, four PPPs, and six ISGs were crucial components of the survey, not only for the content and critical analysis they supplied but also because of the connections they provided to the astronomy and astrophysics community. Moreover the panels and study groups completed a Herculean set of tasks in an extraordinarily short time. The results of their efforts were essential to the deliberations of the committee, the success of whose work depended critically on the sequential and orderly flow of information from the SFPs to the PPPs and then to the committee as provided for in the survey plan and structure. The committee acknowledges with heartfelt thanks the volunteers from the astronomy and astrophysics community who served on the panels and study groups. Their reports stand testament to the hard work done by the members, and especially their chairs, work whose full value will be recognized through the decade to come. In addition, the survey as a whole benefited immensely from the broader participation of the astronomy and astrophysics community, which, over the course of the study, and in particular in the first half of 2009, undertook a massive effort to provide input to the survey process. Included were informal reports from 17 community town hall meetings, in addition to more than 450 white papers on topics including science opportunities, the state of the profession and infrastructure, and opportunities in technology development, theory, computation, and laboratory astrophysics. Critical to the success of the nine panels’ and six study groups’ work, these inputs were also an early product of the survey in that the white papers and various reports were made available on the NRC Web pages. Far more important than the quantity, however, is the quality of the input. As public documents available on the NRC Web pages, many of these essays and proposals have already been widely cited in the professional literature. Although it will be many years before the significance of the survey can be assessed, the impact of the community input is already assured. On behalf of the committee and the panels, sincere thanks are extended to the volunteers from the research community who gave so much of their time to formulate this backbone of information and data as input for the Astro2010 survey process. 5 National Research Council, Panel Reports⎯ New Worlds, New Horizons in Astronomy and Astrophysics, The National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., forthcoming. PREPUBLICATION COPY—SUBJECT TO FURTHER EDITORIAL CORRECTION xv
Page 1: PREPUBLICATION COPY
Page 4 and 5: THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fi
Page 7 and 8: COMMITTEE FOR A DECADAL SURVEY OF A
Page 9 and 10: Panel on Stars and Stellar Evolutio
Page 11 and 12: DOUGLAS FINKBEINER, Harvard Univers
Page 13: SPACE STUDIES BOARD CHARLES F. KENN
Page 18 and 19: In addition to the 27 panel meeting
Page 20 and 21: Acknowledgment of Reviewers This re
Page 22 and 23: The Accelerating Universe 2-26 The
Page 24 and 25: APPENDIXES A Summary of Science Fro
Page 26 and 27: light up the universe, marking the
Page 28 and 29: RECOMMENDED PROGRAM Maintaining a b
Page 30 and 31: TABLE ES.4 Space: Recommended Activ
Page 32 and 33: Cosmic Dawn: Searching for the Firs
Page 34 and 35: this imprint would both probe funda
Page 36 and 37: important outcome will be to open u
Page 38 and 39: estimated to be on the order of $20
Page 40 and 41: observatories. For NASA an annual b
Page 42 and 43: surveys of large fields, enabling s
Page 44 and 45: RECOMMENDATION: U.S. investors in a
Page 46 and 47: departments and the community as a
Page 48 and 49: dominate spending; (2) private-publ
Page 50 and 51: us was certainly evident during the
Page 52 and 53: BOX 2-1 Other Worlds Around Other S
Page 54 and 55: FIGURE 2‐2 The source 3C 75, show
Page 56 and 57: FIGURE 2‐3 Numerical simulation o
Page 58 and 59: FIGURE 2‐4 Left panel: Image of t
Page 60 and 61: FIGURE 2‐6 Top: Schematic of the
Page 62 and 63: Most stars with masses smaller than
Page 64 and 65: BOX 2-2 The Origin of Planets After
Page 66 and 67:
send material raining into the cent
Page 68 and 69:
BOX 2-4 Lifecycles in Galaxies One
Page 70 and 71:
Stars Stars are the most observable
Page 72 and 73:
ubiquitous high-energy charged-part
Page 74 and 75:
The Nature of Inflation As describe
Page 76 and 77:
FIGURE 2‐11 Pie chart showing the
Page 78 and 79:
An important clue to the nature of
Page 80 and 81:
Studying the properties of neutron
Page 82 and 83:
FIGURE 2‐14 A possible pathway is
Page 84 and 85:
partners and makes recommendations
Page 86 and 87:
As astronomy research has blossomed
Page 88 and 89:
are increasingly relevant. The Euro
Page 90 and 91:
TABLE 3-1 Currently Operating OIR F
Page 92 and 93:
29% 1990 44% US Priv US Fed Other E
Page 94 and 95:
CONCLUSION: Complex and high-cost f
Page 96 and 97:
Space Observatories The Laser Inter
Page 98 and 99:
Physics Division (PHY); the Mathema
Page 101 and 102:
4 Astronomy in Society Astronomy of
Page 103 and 104:
FIGURE 4‐2 The dust sculptures of
Page 105 and 106:
FIGURE 4‐5 President Obama takes
Page 107 and 108:
Astronomy Inspires in the Classroom
Page 109 and 110:
teaching the scientific method. The
Page 111 and 112:
where the fraction of astronomers h
Page 113 and 114:
Percentage of AAS Membership by Fie
Page 115 and 116:
0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 PL SO IM AG SF IN S
Page 117 and 118:
FIGURE 4‐12 Number (top panel) an
Page 119 and 120:
Professional training needs to acco
Page 121:
assistant and associate professor p
Page 124 and 125:
fluctuating level of funding for as
Page 126 and 127:
THEORY Emerging Trends in Theoretic
Page 128 and 129:
Central to the Galaxies across Cosm
Page 130 and 131:
TABLE 5‐2 Support for astrophysic
Page 132 and 133:
would normally be for a five-year p
Page 134 and 135:
FIGURE 5‐7 Highly cited HST publi
Page 136 and 137:
y optical and radio astronomers are
Page 138 and 139:
FIGURE 5‐8 Number of PhDs per yea
Page 140 and 141:
ated by the Program Prioritization
Page 142 and 143:
nulling interferometry. The appropr
Page 144 and 145:
FIGURE 5‐9 The richness of the su
Page 146 and 147:
RECOMMENDATION: NASA and NSF suppor
Page 148 and 149:
FIGURE 6‐1. All sky map as observ
Page 150 and 151:
FIGURE 6‐3 NASA mission cost over
Page 152 and 153:
FIGURE 6‐5 Gemini North with Sout
Page 154 and 155:
TOWARD FUTURE PROJECTS, MISSIONS, A
Page 156 and 157:
3. Investment in new and upgraded i
Page 158 and 159:
etween several competing elements i
Page 161 and 162:
7 Realizing the Opportunities The p
Page 163 and 164:
FIGURE 7.1 Survey time line showing
Page 165 and 166:
SCIENCE OBJECTIVES FOR THE DECADE T
Page 167 and 168:
Box 7.1 Implementing a Cosmic Dawn
Page 169 and 170:
JWST, with its superb mid-infrared
Page 171 and 172:
optical imaging of brighter galaxie
Page 173 and 174:
Box 7.3 Implementing the Physics of
Page 175 and 176:
FIGURE 7.2 Multiwavelength images o
Page 177 and 178:
Recommendations for New Space Activ
Page 179 and 180:
FIGURE 7.4 Science accomplishments
Page 181 and 182:
significance of mergers in the buil
Page 183 and 184:
independent advice committee review
Page 185 and 186:
committee review. It could range be
Page 187 and 188:
Laboratory Astrophysics As describe
Page 189 and 190:
Recommendations for New Ground-Base
Page 191 and 192:
Program for instrumentation and fac
Page 193 and 194:
excel at high spectral and spatial
Page 195 and 196:
The committee reviewed a technical
Page 197 and 198:
FIGURE 7.10 ACTA would be, like the
Page 199 and 200:
Advanced Technologies and Instrumen
Page 201 and 202:
LISA as soon as possible subject to
Page 203:
FIGURE 7.14 DOE recommended program
Page 207 and 208:
A Summary of Science Frontiers Pane
Page 209 and 210:
PLANETARY SYSTEMS AND STAR FORMATIO
Page 211 and 212:
A preliminary recommended program w
Page 213 and 214:
certified as independent work perfo
Page 215 and 216:
penalty based on an assessment of s
Page 217 and 218:
The results show excellent correlat
Page 219 and 220:
$12 MILLION TO $40 MILLION RANGE CM
Page 221 and 222:
decadal research strategy with reco
Page 223 and 224:
CFP CHIPSat CIP CGRO CMB CMU CoBRA
Page 225 and 226:
NRC NSB NSF NSF-AGS NSF-ARC NSF-AST
show all

prepublication copy - The Department of Astronomy & Astrophysics ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?