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

Space Observatories
The Laser Interferometer Space Antenna (LISA) and the International X-ray Observatory (IXO)
are two transformational missions where the convergence of scientific goals, complementarity of
expertise, and the desire to produce more science per dollar has made partnering essential. LISA is a
relatively mature NASA/ESA collaboration, while IXO is the result of a more recent merger of the U.S.
Con-X and ESA XEUS missions, with JAXA as an additional partner. NASA is awaiting advice from
this Decadal Survey on the relative rankings of these two projects, and in Europe LISA and IXO are
competing for the first L(arge)-class launch slot (scheduled for 2020) against Laplace (an outer planets
mission) in the ESA Cosmic Vision program, whose down-select process is beginning in 2010. From the
U.S. perspective, the committee would like to see both missions happen, and an implementation plan for
NASA is given in Chapter 7. ESA, on the other hand, may choose a different prioritization, or choose to
go with Laplace.
Even more complex is the potential partnering between NASA, DOE and ESA on a dark energy
mission. Because of the common interests in the science of dark energy, as well as complementary
technical capabilities, NASA and DOE have been planning for a Joint Dark Energy Mission (JDEM)
since 2003. Euclid is a European mission concept aimed at cosmology and dark energy, which is
competing for one of two M(edium)-class launch slots, with a decision expected in late 2011 and launches
scheduled for 2018 and 2019. The overlap in goals and scope between the proposed U.S. and European
missions is significant and there is potentially a grand partnering arrangement involving NASA, DOE and
ESA if the expanded scientific priorities set by this survey for such a mission can be aligned among the
partners, and assuming that the arrangement is consistent with the U.S. playing a clear leadership role.
However, reconciling the outcome and timing of three different decision-making processes is a
challenge.
AGENCY PARTNERSHIPS AND INTERFACES
Revolutionary discoveries in astronomy over the past two decades have broadened the field and
created new interfaces with other areas of science⎯particle physics (the birth and early evolution of the
universe, cosmic rays, dark matter and dark energy), nuclear physics (the origin of the chemical elements
and neutron star structure), gravitational physics (black holes and gravitational waves), planetary science
(the solar system and exoplanets), computer science (analysis of large data sets) and soon biology (life in
the universe). Today, astronomical research involves not only astronomers, but also scientists from many
other fields, especially physics. Because of this, there are more funding agencies involved, which
necessitates careful handling of the complex interfaces between them.
Currently the NASA Astrophysics Division budget within SMD is roughly $1.1B per year
(including construction of major facilities); NSF AST within MPS is $250M per year. Funding from NSF
OPP and NSF PHY is about $10M and $20M respectively with an additional $30M per year going to
operations for the Advanced Laser Interferometer Gravitational-wave Observatory (AdvLIGO). DOE
OHEP within the Office of Science funds particle astrophysics at the level of about $100M per year,
whereas the NSF AST funds investigator-driven research broadly in the astrophysical sciences, and
NASA AD funds space-mission driven astrophysics research broadly defined, the interests of DOE OHEP
and NSF PHY and OPP are more focused. With so many agencies involved, coordination is critical to
obtaining optimal value, both in terms of scientific return and cost effectiveness. Understanding the
different missions and cultures of the funding agencies is a prerequisite to optimizing investment.
• DOE Office of High Energy Physics. DOE is a mission agency, and OHEP’s mission is to
seek a fundamental understanding of matter, energy, space and time, which resonates strongly with much
PREPUBLICATION COPY—SUBJECT TO FURTHER EDITORIAL CORRECTION
3-14