Evaluation Of The Implementation Of Wfirst Afta In The Context Of New Worlds New Horizons In Astronomy And Astrophysics

Evaluation of the Implementation of WFIRST in the Context of New Worlds, New Horizons in Astronomy and Astrophysics assesses whether the proposed Astrophysics Focused Telescope Assets (AFTA) design reference mission described in the April 30, 2013 report of the AFTA Science Definition Team (SDT), WFIRST-2.4, is responsive to the overall strategy to pursue the science objectives of New Worlds, New Horizons in Astronomy and Astrophysics, and in particular, the survey's top ranked, large-scale, space-based priority: the Wide Field Infrared Survey Telescope (WFIRST). This report considers the versions of WFIRST-2.4 with and without the coronagraph, as described in the AFTA SDT report. The report compares the WFIRST mission described in New Worlds, New Horizons to the AFTA SDT WFIRST-2.4 design reference mission, with and without the coronagraph, on the basis of their science objectives, technical complexity, and programmatic rationale, including projected cost. This report gives an overview of relevant scientific, technical, and programmatic changes that have occurred since the release of New Worlds, New Horizons, and assesses the responsiveness of the WFIRST mission to the science and technology objectives of the New Worlds report.

New Worlds, New Horizons in Astronomy and Astrophysics (NWNH), the report of the 2010 decadal survey of astronomy and astrophysics, put forward a vision for a decade of transformative exploration at the frontiers of astrophysics. This vision included mapping the first stars and galaxies as they emerge from the collapse of dark matter and cold clumps of hydrogen, finding new worlds in a startlingly diverse population of extrasolar planets, and exploiting the vastness and extreme conditions of the universe to reveal new information about the fundamental laws of nature. NWNH outlined a compelling program for understanding the cosmic order and for opening new fields of inquiry through the discovery areas of gravitational waves, time-domain astronomy, and habitable planets. Many of these discoveries are likely to be enabled by cyber-discovery and the power of mathematics, physics, and imagination. To help realize this vision, NWNH recommended a suite of innovative and powerful facilities, along with balanced, strong support for the scientific community engaged in theory, data analysis, technology development, and measurements with existing and new instrumentation. Already in the first half of the decade, scientists and teams of scientists working with these cutting-edge instruments and with new capabilities in data collection and analysis have made spectacular discoveries that advance the NWNH vision. New Worlds, New Horizons: A Midterm Assessment reviews the responses of NASA's Astrophysics program, NSF's Astronomy program, and DOE's Cosmic Frontiers program to NWNH. This report describes the most significant scientific discoveries, technical advances, and relevant programmatic changes in astronomy and astrophysics over the years since the publication of the decadal survey, and assesses how well the Agencies' programs address the strategies, goals, and priorities outlined in the 2010 decadal survey.

Evaluation of the Implementation of WFIRST in the Context of New Worlds, New Horizons in Astronomy and Astrophysics assesses whether the proposed Astrophysics Focused Telescope Assets (AFTA) design reference mission described in the April 30, 2013 report of the AFTA Science Definition Team (SDT), WFIRST-2.4, is responsive to the overall strategy to pursue the science objectives of New Worlds, New Horizons in Astronomy and Astrophysics, and in particular, the survey's top ranked, large-scale, space-based priority: the Wide Field Infrared Survey Telescope (WFIRST). This report considers the versions of WFIRST-2.4 with and without the coronagraph, as described in the AFTA SDT report. The report compares the WFIRST mission described in New Worlds, New Horizons to the AFTA SDT WFIRST-2.4 design reference mission, with and without the coronagraph, on the basis of their science objectives, technical complexity, and programmatic rationale, including projected cost. This report gives an overview of relevant scientific, technical, and programmatic changes that have occurred since the release of New Worlds, New Horizons, and assesses the responsiveness of the WFIRST mission to the science and technology objectives of the New Worlds report.

The original charter of the Space Science Board was established in June 1958, 3 months before the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) opened its doors. The Space Science Board and its successor, the Space Studies Board (SSB), have provided expert external and independent scientific and programmatic advice to NASA on a continuous basis from NASA's inception until the present. The SSB has also provided such advice to other executive branch agencies, including the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the National Science Foundation (NSF), the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the Department of Defense, as well as to Congress. Space Studies Board Annual Report 2014 covers a message from the chair of the SSB, David N. Spergel. This report also explains the origins of the Space Science Board, how the Space Studies Board functions today, the SSB's collaboration with other National Research Council units, assures the quality of the SSB reports, acknowledges the audience and sponsors, and expresses the necessity to enhance the outreach and improve dissemination of SSB reports. This report will be relevant to a full range of government audiences in civilian space research - including NASA, NSF, NOAA, USGS, and the Department of Energy, as well members of the SSB, policy makers, and researchers.

The original charter of the Space Science Board was established in June 1958, three months before the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) opened its doors. The Space Science Board and its successor, the Space Studies Board (SSB), have provided expert external and independent scientific and programmatic advice to NASA on a continuous basis from NASA's inception until the present. The SSB has also provided such advice to other executive branch agencies, including the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the National Science Foundation (NSF), the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the Department of Defense, as well as to Congress. Space Studies Board Annual Report 2017 covers a message from the chair of the SSB, David N. Spergel. This report also explains the origins of the Space Science Board, how the Space Studies Board functions today, the SSB's collaboration with other National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine units, assures the quality of the SSB reports, acknowledges the audience and sponsors, and expresses the necessity to enhance the outreach and improve dissemination of SSB reports. This report will be relevant to a full range of government audiences in civilian space research - including NASA, NSF, NOAA, USGS, and the Department of Energy, as well members of the SSB, policy makers, and researchers.

Space-based observations have transformed our understanding of Earth, its environment, the solar system and the universe at large. During past decades, driven by increasingly advanced science questions, space observatories have become more sophisticated and more complex, with costs often growing to billions of dollars. Although these kinds of ever-more-sophisticated missions will continue into the future, small satellites, ranging in mass between 500 kg to 0.1 kg, are gaining momentum as an additional means to address targeted science questions in a rapid, and possibly more affordable, manner. Within the category of small satellites, CubeSats have emerged as a space-platform defined in terms of (10 cm x 10 cm x 10 cm)- sized cubic units of approximately 1.3 kg each called "U's." Historically, CubeSats were developed as training projects to expose students to the challenges of real-world engineering practices and system design. Yet, their use has rapidly spread within academia, industry, and government agencies both nationally and internationally. In particular, CubeSats have caught the attention of parts of the U.S. space science community, which sees this platform, despite its inherent constraints, as a way to affordably access space and perform unique measurements of scientific value. The first science results from such CubeSats have only recently become available; however, questions remain regarding the scientific potential and technological promise of CubeSats in the future. Achieving Science with CubeSats reviews the current state of the scientific potential and technological promise of CubeSats. This report focuses on the platform's promise to obtain high- priority science data, as defined in recent decadal surveys in astronomy and astrophysics, Earth science and applications from space, planetary science, and solar and space physics (heliophysics); the science priorities identified in the 2014 NASA Science Plan; and the potential for CubeSats to advance biology and microgravity research. It provides a list of sample science goals for CubeSats, many of which address targeted science, often in coordination with other spacecraft, or use "sacrificial," or high-risk, orbits that lead to the demise of the satellite after critical data have been collected. Other goals relate to the use of CubeSats as constellations or swarms deploying tens to hundreds of CubeSats that function as one distributed array of measurements.

On December 2-3, 2014, the Space Studies Board and the Board on Science Education of the National Research Council held a workshop on the NASA Science Mission Directorate (SMD) education program - "Sharing the Adventure with the Student." The workshop brought together representatives of the space science and science education communities to discuss maximizing the effectiveness of the transfer of knowledge from the scientists supported by NASA's SMD to K-12 students directly and to teachers and informal educators. The workshop focused not only on the effectiveness of recent models for transferring science content and scientific practices to students, but also served as a venue for dialogue between education specialists, education staff from NASA and other agencies, space scientists and engineers, and science content generators. Workshop participants reviewed case studies of scientists or engineers who were able to successfully translate their research results and research experiences into formal and informal student science learning. Education specialists shared how science can be translated to education materials and directly to students, and teachers shared their experiences of space science in their classrooms. Sharing the Adventure with the Student is the summary of the presentation and discussions of the workshop.

The National Research Council has conducted 11 decadal surveys in the Earth and space sciences since 1964 and released the latest four surveys in the past 8 years. The decadal surveys are notable in their ability to sample thoroughly the research interest, aspirations, and needs of a scientific community. Through a rigorous process, a primary survey committee and thematic panels of community members construct a prioritized program of science goals and objectives and define an executable strategy for achieving them. These reports play a critical role in defining the nation's agenda in that science area for the following 10 years, and often beyond. The Space Science Decadal Surveys considers the lessons learned from previous surveys and presents options for possible changes and improvements to the process, including the statement of task, advanced preparation, organization, and execution. This report discusses valuable aspects of decadal surveys that could taken further, as well as some challenges future surveys are likely to face in searching for the richest areas of scientific endeavor, seeking community consensus of where to go next, and planning how to get there. The Space Science Decadal Surveys describes aspects in the decadal survey prioritization process, including balance in the science program and across the discipline; balance between the needs of current researchers and the development of the future workforce; and balance in mission scale - smaller, competed programs versus large strategic missions.