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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

this imprint would both probe fundamental physics at very high energies and bear witness to the birth of the universe. Yet another opportunity to study fundamental principles comes from precisely observing the behavior of black holes. Black holes are commonly found in the nuclei of normal galaxies and are born when very massive stars end their stellar lives. Scientists have an exact theoretical description of spacetime around black holes but do not know if this description is correct. One way to find out is to observe X-ray-emitting gas and stars as they spiral toward a black hole’s event horizon beyond which nothing, not even light, can escape. Another is to observe the jets that escape black holes with speeds close to that of light. However, the best test of all will come from measuring the gravitational radiation that is observed when moderate-mass black holes merge. We now have the software and the computing power to calculate the signals that should be seen and the technology to test the theory. What excites astronomers and physicists alike is that the tools are now at hand to greatly expand current understanding of fundamental physics in new and important ways. OPTIMIZING THE SCIENCE PROGRAM Astronomy is a rich and diverse science that encompasses much more than the grand challenges described above. There are great opportunities to be seized over a broad research program, as described in Chapter 2. Astronomy is still driven by discovery, and when the programs described in past decadal surveys were successfully executed, many of the most important results were largely unanticipated. The new facilities contained in this survey’s recommended program are highly versatile. In addition to carrying out the observational program described, they will advance the broad research program and are also able to both make and respond to fresh breakthroughs. This report is written at a time when the nation’s finances are severely stressed. The committee was charged to consider alternative budget scenarios. It chose to adopt for each agency the agencyprojected budget and a second, optimistic budget that reflects modest relative growth. In the case of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), the agency-projected budget is flat in real-year dollars and allows very little new activity until the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) is launched, presumably in mid-decade. The optimistic budget used by the committee is flat in FY2010 dollars. In the case of the National Science Foundation (NSF), the agency-projected budget is flat in FY2010 dollars, which allows little to no opportunity for new activity over the entire decade, given the obligations to support existing facilities. The optimistic budget used by the committee supposes growth in purchasing power at a rate of 4 percent per year, the so-called doubling scenario that is being applied to the overall NSF budget. In the case of the Department of Energy (DOE), the agency-projected budget is constant in FY2010 dollars, and the optimistic budget used by the committee is also on a doubling track, consistent with the current administration’s stated policy for the DOE Office of Science. The committee’s recommended program that follows has been constrained to fit under the optimistic budget envelopes. Descopes that will be needed under less favorable budgets are also described. A successful federal research program must also be balanced. There is a trade-off between investing in the development and construction of ambitious new telescopes and supporting broad-ranging observational and theoretical research that optimizes the return from operating facilities. The goal of the committee, consistent with its charge, has been to maximize the scientific return for a given budget. The committee found that in some cases the balance of resources is not optimal, and this report contains a number of recommendations to augment or adjust the foundations of the program. The committee’s proposed program (Chapter 7) is recommended on the basis of four general criteria—maximizing scientific contribution, building on the current astronomy and astrophysics enterprise, balancing this decade’s programs against investing in the next decade’s, and optimizing the science return given the highly constrained budget. These criteria are discussed further below. The resulting program emphasizes certain capabilities for U.S. leadership, including all-sky synoptic imaging on the ground and in space, large-aperture telescopes, exploration of non-electromagnetic portals to the PREPUBLICATION COPY—SUBJECT TO FURTHER EDITORIAL CORRECTION 1-4
universe, technology and software, public-private and international partnerships, frequent opportunities for new medium-scale instrumentation on the ground and in space, and interdisciplinary work, especially work involving connections between astrophysics and physics. Finally, a key concern of the committee’s is the stewardship of the present survey’s recommended program. Although a good-faith attempt has been made to provide answers to all the questions raised by the charge, it is in the very nature of research that unforeseen issues requiring community advice will arise. In addition, there will be a need to monitor progress. Accordingly, the survey will need stewardship over the coming decade in the form of strategic advice requested by but generated independent of the agencies supporting the field. RECOMMENDATION: NASA, NSF, and DOE should on a regular basis request advice from an independent standing committee constituted to monitor progress toward reaching the goals recommended in the decadal survey of astronomy and astrophysics, and to provide strategic advice to the agencies over the decade of implementation. Such a decadal survey implementation advisory committee (DSIAC) should be charged to produce annual reports to the agencies, the Office of Management and Budget, and the Office of Science and Technology Policy, as well as a mid-decade review of the progress made. The implementation advisory committee should be independent of the agencies and the agency advisory committees in its membership, management, and operation. PROPOSED PROGRAM OF ACTIVITIES The committee’s recommended program is presented in terms of specific space-based 2 and ground-based projects and opportunities. In space, large-scale activities are those having a total appraised cost exceeding $1 billion, while medium-scale activities have a total cost estimated to range from $300 million to $1 billion. On the ground, large-scale activities are those whose total cost is appraised to exceed $135 million, while medium-scale activities have a total cost in the range of $4 million to $135 million. All values are in FY2010 dollars. 3 Wide Field Infrared Survey Telescope (WFIRST) Space Projects – Large – in Rank Order A 1.5-meter wide-field-of-view near-infrared-imaging and low-resolution-spectroscopy telescope, WFIRST will settle fundamental questions about the nature of dark energy, the discovery of which was one of the greatest achievements of U.S. telescopes in recent years. It will employ three distinct techniques—measurements of weak gravitational lensing, supernova distances, and baryon acoustic oscillations—to determine the effect of dark energy on the evolution of the universe. An equally 2 Two space missions recommended in the 2001 decadal survey Astronomy and Astrophysics in the New Millennium—namely ARISE and EXIST—and one recommended by the 1991 The Decade of Discovery in Astronomy and Astrophysics survey, SIM, do not appear in this survey’s priorities. The goals of ARISE have been largely subsumed by JAXA's VSOP-2 project and the SAMURAI proposal. EXIST and SIM (now SIMLite) are not included in the recommended program for the decade, following the committee’s consideration of the strengths of competing compelling scientific opportunities and the highly constrained budget scenarios described in this report. 3 All costs are given in FY2010 dollars. A recommendation of level funding is equivalent to a recommendation of constant level of effort. Details on the methodology used to assess cost and schedule risk and technical readiness are provided in Chapter 7 and Appendix C. Cost and schedule risk was assessed relative to project estimates. Technical readiness was assessed independent of cost. The risk scale used was low, medium low, medium, medium high, and high. PREPUBLICATION COPY—SUBJECT TO FURTHER EDITORIAL CORRECTION 1-5
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 16 and 17: activities 2 that have emerged from
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 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?