Report from the NSF Division of Physics

Transcription

1 Report from the NSF Division of Physics Joe Dehmer Division of Physics BPA April 27, 2012

2 Division of Physics AMOP Physics Elementary Particle Physics Part. & Nucl. Astrophysics Physics Front. Centers Theoretical Physics Nuclear Physics Physics of Living Systems Inform. Front. Gravitational Physics Education & Interdisc. Res. Accelerator Phy. & Phy. Instrum.

3 PHYSICS * FRONTIERS, circa 2012 Cold Atoms, Bose-Einstein Condensates Dark Matter, Dark Energy, Cosmology Gravitational Waves (GW), GW Astronomy New Fundamental Particles and Laws > TeV physics and astrophysics String Theory, Branes, Duality, Quantum Gravity Quark-Gluon Plasma, Supernova Dynamics Ultra-Fast, Ultra-Intense Laser Fields Cyberscience, Quantum Information Science Biophysics of Single Molecules, Cells, Networks Complexity, Emergent Behavior * CMP in Division of Materials Research 3

4 INVESTMENT GOALS Major scientific advances that alter the course of physics and other fields Seeds of advances in nation s health (Varmus), wealth (Solow), and defense (Hart-Rudman), also Gathering Storm, ACI, ACA International leadership/cooperation across the intellectual frontiers of science Recruitment of exceptional talent into science (education, outreach, and early inspiration) Significantly increase diversity in science Production of highly trained professionals for the nation s workforce 4

5 Innovation: PHY Role Innovation involves the answers to two questions: What is possible, and What is needed. A non-linear process, involving advancing the intellectual frontiers, making connections between what is possible and what is needed, and inventing a new deployable capability. Best viewed as an innovation ecosystem, with multiple keystone species, e.g., universities, industry, government, scientists, concepts, techniques. PHY role (strategy) has three components: Advance intellectual frontiers expanding boundaries of what is possible Develop the intellectual capital to activate the ecosystem Seize opportunities to apply new knowledge to practical needs This ecosystem perspective matters because planning horizons shorten when funding is short, and this tends to emphasize incremental steps, not disruptively transformational events, which are usually not at all related to perceived needs, e.g., GPS system, which depends on fundamental developments made decades apart over a century for other reasons. 5

6 OneNSF Priority Areas Cyber-Enabled Materials Manufacturing and Smart Systems (CEMMSS) Science, Engineering, and Education for Sustainability (SEES) Cyberinfrastructure Framework for 21 st Century Science and Engineering (CIF21) Enhancing Access to the Radio Spectrum (EARS) Research at the Interface of Biological, Mathematical, and Physical Sciences (BioMaPS) Inspire, I-Corps, and SAVI Expeditions in Education (E 2 ) Secure and Trustworthy Cyberspace (SaTC) 6

7 OneMPS Investments Cyber-Enabled Materials Manufacturing and Smart Systems (CEMMSS, $50.0M) Science, Engineering, and Education for Sustainability (SEES, $27.2M) Cyberinfrastructure Framework for 21 st Century Science and Engineering (CIF21, $19.5M) Enhancing Access to the Radio Spectrum (EARS, $12.0M) Research at the Interface of Biological, Mathematical, and Physical Sciences (BioMaPS, $11.6M) INSPIRE, I-Corps, and SAVI ($8.3M) Expeditions in Education (E 2, $5.0M) Secure and Trustworthy Cyberspace (SaTC, $2.0M) 7

8 Summary Table FY 2013 Request to Congress (Dollars in Millions) FY 2013 Request over: FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2011 Actual FY 2012 Estimate NSF by Account Actual Estimate Request Amount Percent Amount Percent BIO $ $ $ $ % $ % CISE % % ENG % % ENG Programs % % SBIR/STTR % % GEO % % MPS 1, , , % % SBE % % OCI % % OISE % % OPP % % IA % % U.S. Arctic Research Commission % % Research & Related Activities $5, $5, $5, $ % $ % Education & Human Resources $ $ $ $ % $ % Major Research Equipment & $ $ $ $ % -$ % Facilities Construction Agency Operations & Award Management $ $ $ $ % - - National Science Board $4.47 $4.44 $4.44 -$ % - - Office of Inspector General $13.92 $14.20 $14.20 $ % - - OIG FY 2011 ARRA Obligations $ Total, NSF $6, $7, $7, $ % $ % Totals may not add due to rounding. 1 FY 2011 Actual for OCI includes $90.50 million in funds that were obligated in FY 2010, deobligated in FY 2011, and then obligated in FY 2011 to other projects in the OCI portfolio.

9 R&RA Funding (Dollars in Millions) Change over FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2012 Estimate Actual Estimate Request Amount Percent Biological Sciences $ $ $ $ % Computer & Information Science & Engineering % Engineering % Geosciences % Mathematical & Physical Sciences 1, , , % Social, Behavioral & Economic Sciences % Office of Cyberinfrastructure % Office of International Science & Engineering % Office of Polar Programs % Integrative Activities % U.S. Arctic Research Commission % Total, R&RA $5, $5, $5, $ % Totals may not add due to rounding. 1 Funding for FY 2011 Actual excludes a one-time appropriation transfer of $54.0 million, less the 0.2% rescission, to the U.S. Coast Guard per P.L

10 MPS Funding (Dollars in Millions) FY 2011 Actual FY 2012 Estimate FY 2013 Request Change Over FY 2012 Estimate Amount Percent Division of Astronomical Sciences (AST) $ $ $ $ % Division of Chemistry (CHE) % Division of Materials Research (DMR) % Division of Mathematical Sciences (DMS) % Division of Physics (PHY) % Office of Multidisciplinary Activities (OMA) % Total, MPS $1, $1, $1, $ % Totals may not add due to rounding.

11 % PHY Budget Budget sectors over time Core vs Centers vs Facilities core centers 70 facilities Fiscal Year FY 2009 Includes ARRA

12 Personnel on Awards (FY 11) Senior Personnel 1,422 Active awards 1,302 Postdocs 534 Other Professionals 1,198 Graduate Students 1,208 Undergraduate Students 672* *Plus about 444 at REU Sites

13 Number Active Awards 300 Female PI or co-pi on Active Awards Female PI Female PI or Co-PI Fiscal Year

14 Number of Active Awards 160 Minority PI or co-pi on Active Awards Minority PI Minority PI or co-pi Fiscal Year

15 Percentage Funded Women and Minority Funding Rates 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% Minority Women Total 0% Fiscal Year

16 PHY Budget Actions/Plans LHC, IceCube, NSCL flat, LIGO up $100K All programs cut 5% initially, with 2% restored when budget finalized Investments in BioMaPS, CIF21, SAVI Redirect DUSEL S4 funding to underground science Midscale physics instrumentation is a priority for future budget cycles, and some funds are being applied to seed the activity Also discussing accelerator physics research at universities for possible investment The last two bullets express the intent of the APPI program Theory programs will be boosted, since major priority (APPI) benefits all experimental programs

17 Comments FY2012 is the year of the ARRA cohort echo exacerbating flat budget Important role of basic research for future innovation not well understood needs constant reinforcement AdvLIGO and LIGO-India IceCube up and running LHC up and running NSAC charged to do prioritization of major facilities Important planning effort by DPF and others, leading to Snowmass 2013 strategic planning for particle physics Think on two levels: what s doable this decade, and the grander vision to which short term plan leads Make a plan/vision for the next decade that makes sense to those outside the field in that it s executable, delivers significant results at a regular pace, maintains vigorous US community, meshes with the global picture, and flows into the future in a plausible way

18 Facilities LIGO/AdvLIGO (construction to end in FY2015) LHC (began operating at 7 Tev in FY 2010) IceCube (began operating in FY2011) NSCL (to be succeeded by FRIB) DUSEL (MREFC project cancelled in FY2011) CESR/CLEO (Phased out in FY2009) Midscale: ACT, SPT, Auger, CDMS, XENON, LUX, WARP, ZEPLIN, CoGeNT, COUPP, DArkside, DRIFT, MiniLens, Borexino, Double Chooz, Daya Bay, CUORE, Majorana, QUIET, HiRES, TA, Milagro, HAWC, Stacey, Veritas, MiniBoone, MicroBoone, Numi/MINOS, RHIC end-cap calorimeter, university based NP accelerators, several MRI projects, etc. 18

19 Physics Frontiers Centers Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics Chicago - Turner (PHY/OPP) Center for Ultracold Atoms MIT/Harvard - Ketterle JILA Colorado Cornell Kavli Institute for Theoretical Physics UCSB Gross (Joint MPS/PHY/AST/DMR and BIO) Center for Theoretical Biological Physics UCSD Onuchic (Joint MPS/PHY/DMR and BIO)

20 Physics Frontiers Centers (Cont d) Joint Institute for Nuclear Astrophysics Notre Dame - Wiescher Center for Magnetic Self-Organization in Laboratory and Astrophysical Plasmas Wisconsin Zweibel (Joint NSF/DOE) Joint Quantum Institute Maryland/NIST Phillips (PHY/DMR) Center for the Physics of Living Cells U Illinois Ha (Joint MPS/PHY/CHE/DMR and BIO) Institute for Quantum Information and Matter Caltech - Kimble (PHY/CISE)

21 LIGO and Advanced LIGO Gravitational waves are produced by some of nature s most violent events and are ubiquitous in the universe, but they have never been directly measured. NSF s LIGO facility has the goals of making the first direct detection of gravitational waves (GWs) and of initiating the field of GW astronomy. The Advanced LIGO construction project will increase the sensitivity of LIGO s detectors by a factor of 10, increasing the searchable volume of space by a factor of ~1000. LIGO has two detector sites: one detector is in Livingston, LA, and two collocated detectors are at the Hanford, WA site. LIGO operates in collaboration with the Virgo detector in Italy.

22 Scientific rationale for LIGO-India An Indian detector, along with Advanced LIGO US and the Advanced Virgo, will allow greatly improved triangulation of GW sources with a truly global array. Accurate spatial location of potential GW sources allows rapid confirmation by telescopes and neutrino detectors, enhancing knowledge of the sources and providing an important validation process for gravitational-wave detections. The mapping of GW sources is also of great interest to astronomers. A new site will also allow the detector to be oriented for optimum signal extraction. LIGO-India will provide a spatial resolution nearly as good as LIGO- Australia: LIGO + Virgo Average resolution ~1.5 x 10 LIGO + Virgo + India Average resolution ~1.5 x 2.3 LIGO + Virgo + Australia Average resolution ~1.5 x 1.5