Meg Urry Yale University Co-chair, NRC Committee on Astronomy & Astrophysics

1. Committee to Assess Progress Toward Achieving the Decadal Vision in Astronomy & Astrophysics (a.k.a. Mid-Course Review) Meg Urry Yale University Co-chair, NRC Committee on Astronomy & Astrophysics AAAC – February 12,2005

2. Origin • CAA (=Committee on Astronomy and Astrophysics)and parent Boards(BPA=Board on Physics and Astronomy and SSB=Space Studies Board)asked whether science strategy of decadal survey (AANM=Astronomy and Astrophysics in the New Millennium) supplemented by Q2C report (=Connecting Quarks with the Cosmos: Eleven Science Questions for the New Century) is on course or should be reexamined. • Discussion prompted by changes in substance(scientific and technical advances)and context(Q2C, NASA, NSF, DOE). • NRC initiated the study.

3. Charge to the Committee “An NRC committee will prepare a short report reviewing the scientific discoveries and technical advances in astronomy and astrophysics over the 5 years since the publication of the decadal survey, Astronomy and Astrophysics in the New Millennium (AANM). It will address the implications of scientific and technical developments as well as changes in the federal program. It will assess progress toward realizing the vision for the field articulated in AANM and supplemented by Connecting Quarks with the Cosmos.”

4. Meg Urry, Yale University,Chair(CAA, BPA) Lars Bildsten, University of California, Santa Barbara (CAA) Roger Blandford, Stanford University (CAA, SSB, Q2C) John Carlstrom, University of Chicago (CAA) Neal Evans, II, University of Texas Jacqueline Hewitt, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (SSB) Craig Hogan, University of Washington John Huchra, Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics (Q2C) Christopher McKee, University of California, Berkeley (AASC, BPA) Anneila Sargent, California Institute of Technology (AASC, BPA) Sara Seager, Carnegie Institution of Washington Charles Woodward, University of Minnesota (CAA) Committee Membership

5. Structure of Letter Report • Summary of changes (substance/context) • Overview of science advances • Overview of tech developments • Assessment of progress toward Vision • Opportunities • Obstacles

6. Science • Do new discoveries (e.g., dark energy) require new survey to exploit? • Dramatic advances since 2000: • Dark energy, structure of the Universe • Planets/disks around other stars • Formation and evolution of black holes

7. I. The Age of the Universe, the History of Its Expansion, and the Nature of Matter and Energy • Dark Energy and Fundamental Physics • Dark Matter and the Density of the Universe • The Dawn of the Modern Universe: The First Stars • The First Galaxies and Early Star Formation

8. HST CXO WMAP

9. II. Our Place in the Cosmos: the Formation of Stars and Planetary Systems, and the Sun’s Effect on Earth • Planets Around Other Stars • Planetary Formation • Solar System Formation • The Physics of the Sun and Its Effect on Our World • Our Galaxy’s Supermassive Black Hole and Star Formation

11. III. The Formation and Evolution of Black Holes and Probing Strong Gravity and High Densities • Solving the Mystery of the X-ray Background • Supermassive Black Holes in Galaxy Nuclei • Exploring Curved Space-Time Around Spinning Black Holes • Neutron Star Laboratories for Precision Tests of General Relativity and Physics at High Densities

13. Technology • Successful implementation of AANM requires timely and sustained commitment to technology development. • Committee sees no technological breakthroughs or challenges that require further assessment or imperil AANM vision. • TPF-C handled in recent NRC TPF letter report. • New technologies may arise in new Exploration Vision; if so, optimal for input to next decadal survey.

14. Human Capital • Significant and pressing concern: effect of ongoing programmatic changes on young investigators. • Talented students are strongly attracted to astronomy and astrophysics but are hesitant in the current uncertain climate to commit their future careers to the field.

15. Assessment “The remarkable advancesin understanding in astronomy and astrophysics achieved over the past 5 yearsdo not require that the NRCreexamine the AANM report orundertake an in-depth mid-course reviewof the scientific goals or recommended priorities. On the contrary, progress in the field validates the broad scientific program envisioned by the survey and implemented thus far by the agencies.”

16. Balance and Flexibility • Balance across subdisciplines critical in astronomy and astrophysics. • Most exciting scientific discoveries from new instruments often not anticipated. (Programs must be flexible enough to explore unforeseen phenomena.) • Success of A&A decadal survey programs over past 50 years attests to wisdom of balanced approach.

17. Interagency Coordination • Formation of AAAC and interagency teams (viz. OSTP’s The Physics of the Universe) are significant and important for achieving decadal vision. • Coordination works because of strong planning process in this field - the astronomy and astrophysics surveys provide the strategic underpinnings for a cohesive interagency effort.

18. Strategic Planning (NSF & DOE) • Strategic planning underway at NSFAstronomy Division isessential steptowardtransformation necessary formanaging large AANM projects. • Senior reviews valuable for periodic assessment ofallocation of resources across disciplines. • Future planning for astronomy and astrophysics should take into account theincreasing involvement of the DOE’s Office of Scienceand the scientists that it supports. • DOE should continue to coordinate its program with NASA and the NSF; its participation in the AAAC is an important step.

19. Strategic Planning (NASA) • NASA has an important tradition of roadmapping and strategic planning, carried out with help from the agency’s FACA advisory committees. • Beyond Einstein roadmap is excellent synthesis and implementation of AANM and Q2C reports. • Demonstrates how agency processes can integrate new discoveries into the broad framework laid out by the decadal survey.

20. Explorers and Probes • Implementation of Einstein probes to be carried outincompetitiveenvironmentdesignedto yield best science. • Concept of Einstein Probes builds on legacy of successful, cost-effective Explorer line of missions. • Explorers (Probes) allow NASA to respond to new scientific discoveries without waiting for the next decadal survey. • Open, competitive nature of Explorers/Probes ensures best science is done and adds to vitality of field.

21. Beyond Einstein • Beyond Einstein includes AANM high-priority missions Con-X and LISAas facility-class missions called Einstein Great Observatories. • Einstein Great Observatories will provide broad and flexible science returnacross all of astrophysics, like HST, CGRO, Chandra, and Spitzer. • Support for Beyond Einstein projects needs to be sustained.Especially important for projects now underway, in order to maintain continuity in expertise. • Aldridge commission’s notional science agenda for implementing the new Exploration Visionincludesthescientific goalsarticulatedin Beyond Einsteinroadmap.

22. Theory • NSF postdoctoral fellowshipsopen to theoristsand realgrowth in individual grantsprogram have been positive responses to AANM recommendations on theory. • No theory challenges have been explicitly implementedin any AANM-recommended initiatives now underway, potentially inhibiting the synergy envisioned by the AANM survey committee, which advocated the kind of broad, visionary theory program that enhances the discovery potential of future missions.

23. Hubble (in time of rapid change!) • Committee agrees with conclusions of Lanzerotti report (Committee on the Assessment of Options for Extending the Life of the Hubble Space Telescope): • Future promise of extended HST mission is unquestionably exciting and of immense value. • Only effective means of servicing HST is shuttle servicing mission.

24. Future re Hubble • AANM priorities should form basis of nation’s programin astronomy and astrophysics even if HST ceases operation [before 2010]. • If cost of repairing HST ordevelopinga fast-trackHST replacementis largeenough to threaten the timely completion of a substantial fraction of the projects recommended in the AANM report and Q2C, thenscientific community should be involved in assessing the relative valueof HST or its replacement vis-à-vis the affected program.

25. Exploration Initiative • NASA’s new Exploration Initiative has brought awelcome new purposeto human spaceflight side of agency and has provided some new opportunities for selected areas of the science program. • Long-term impact on astronomy and astrophysicsnot entirely clearbutshort-term changes are already having an effect, and there are community concerns thatserious problems may lie ahead. • Committee very concernedthat selective impacts will adversely affect NASA’s ability to generate the kind of transformational science that is hallmark of past decades. • Committee believes thatmaintaining the breadth of the astronomy and astrophysics enterprise at NASA is consistent with new Exploration Vision.

26. Conclusion • The committee and the community it represents value immensely theongoing dialog betweenthe astronomy and astrophysicscommunity and the agencies. • As long as the necessary breadth and balance are maintained in the current scientific program for astronomy and astrophysics,prospects for an unprecedented decade of discovery are indeed bright.

27. Backup Slides

28. AANM Key Science Questions • How did universe begin, how did it evolve from primordial soup of elementary particles into complex structures seen today, and what is its destiny? • How do galaxies first arise and mature? • How are stars born and how do they live and die? • How do planets form and change as they age? • Does life exist elsewhere in the universe?

29. What is dark matter? What is dark energy? How did the universe begin? Was Einstein right about gravity? How have neutrinos shaped the universe? What are nature’s most energetic particles? Are protons unstable? What are the new states of matter? Are there more space-time dimensions? How were elements from Fe to Uraniummade? Is new theory of light and matter needed? Q2C Key Science Questions

30. Reviewers • Donald C. Backer, University of California, Berkeley, • Andrea M. Ghez, University of California, Los Angeles, • Jonathan E. Grindlay, Harvard University, • Natalie A. Roe, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, • Joseph H. Taylor, Jr., Princeton University, • Alan M. Title, Lockheed Martin, • J. Craig Wheeler, University of Texas, and • Edward L. Wright, University of California, Los Angeles.