From 30 November 2011
I feel like a kid in a freshly stocked candy shop today. This must be the big catchup day for no papers last Friday. Probably 70% more than usual today, and so many of them were exciting... but I pared it down to ten, including a few that only get short descriptions. Of the ones I didn't pick: There were a batch about the SDSS CoAddition (new SDSS data). There were many about specific transient events of various sorts. There were several about perterbations in the inflating universe (I grabbed two of these). Observation of SN remnants, and other entertaining fare made up the rest.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.6587 is a paper about the soon-to-be-launched eROSITA probe, which is a new xray telescope with much higher sensativity than Chandra and XMM Newton. The goal of this instrument is to study early clusters, looking for non-gaussian qualities that will put important new constraints on the LCDM parameter space. I like to know about upcoming instruments and what we hope to learn from them.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.6589 is a paper about a quiet low-mass xray binary discovered IN an open cluster... implying that it is a young object, while by its nature it must be an old object. Spoiler-alert: there are some low but realistic probabilities for interaction-events to have created this object in the short time allowed. It is interesting that we had to explore the low probability scenarios.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.6596 is a somewhat math-heavy paper looking at a math-heavy topic: i.e. the possibly already observed effects of perturbations and beat-coupling effects in the primordial, inflating universe on the universe we see today. This paper doesn't come right out and say it, but there effects can include structure larger than what unperturbed LCDM predicts, potentially solving a mystery. BTW, there are quite a few papers today about perturbed inflation.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.6940 is another math-heavy paper about perturbations in the inflating universe... this one looks at Planck and WMAP7 data and large scale curvatures. This paper was enough beyond me that I walk away with an impression that I learned something, but what I take away most urgently is a belief that I need to understand this topic better. It is a major part of cosmology in the next few years.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.6610 is about looking at the Crab pulsar's output above 100 GeV. The results here are unexpected. Conventional astronomy had predicted a cutoff, but this research shows a broken power-law spectrum continuing to higher energies. The paper describes the observation methods, what was detected, and speculates on the physical models that could explain it. It changes (in small ways) my mental image of how pulsars work.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.6666 is about looking for dark baryonic matter (some of the missing matter, as opposed to the missing mass) in the form of free planet sized objects seen as microlensing (or nanolensing as this paper calls it) events of multiply imaged quasars. This is a proposal not results. The idea is cool. I hope they get funding.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.6678 caught my inner Beavis and Butthead. I pictured the research being done at UT Austin. The paper itself is about a special class of non-eclipsing cataclismic variables.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.6700 is about building a 2nd generation Laue Lens instrument to do low-energy gamma-ray observations with incredibly high precision. A lot of the gammas sought in papers I highlight come from super-energetic sources. The gammas I grew up with are narrow-line spectra emited by decaying radionucleides... and those lines are in the sweet spot of this instrument. This is a tool for looking at the census of species in young supernova remnants, and other places such places. Great new science is coming from this thing once it is in service.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.6806 is a plasma lenses... that is to say it is about how stable arcs in giant magnetic fields can result in extreme scattering events. I point to this paper because there are people I interact with whose version of "everything you know is wrong" is about how powerful electromagnetic effects explain things we normally attribute to gravity (among other things). These folks are from the "Worlds In Collision" school of thought. But there ARE places where very powerful electromagnetic effects do produce phenomena that we observe. This paper is about such a situation.
Forming opinions as we speak
From 1 December 2011
Back to the normal number of papers, but too many caught my eye. Some that almost made the list here include a look at Yellow Super Giants as a type of SN progenator, a review of post WMAP and LHC Neutrino Cosmology, a look at radio emissions from Ultra Cool Dwarfs, and a paper on a Quadratic Lagrangian as an alternative theory of gravity. The others I didn't pick included simulations, software tools, analyses of specific events, and other reworking of older observations. All-in-all a very interesting day.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.6973 is one I expect to see journalists retelling. This is an observation of a z=1.35 irregular galaxy with three rapidly accreting SMBHs each about the size of Sgr A*.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.6976 is a paper about uncertainties in stellar models, and the impact they have on searches for exoplanets. To me the more interesting aspect was just getting a current sense of how much uncertainty there is in our stellar models in terms or radius, temperature, metalicity, density, rotation rates, etc.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.6977 was a little disappointing to me. It was a nice paper about the formation times and growth histories of Dark Matter Haloes, but I had anticipated it would be a little more concrete about mergers and distributions afterward. It is heavy on the equations, and works it out for one model of early dark matter distribution in the universe.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.7021 is about a potential core forming clump (about 100 solar masses) in the Perseus B1-E region, and http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.7023 is about the Cygnus X star forming region. Both of these papers appeal to my interest in seeing snapshots of how clouds of gas turn into stars. The first one looks at a place very early in the process with some beautiful images from Herschal and other sources. The second looks at the parallaxes and proper motions of masers (possible to get great precision from these microwave sources) in a star forming region to get a better sense of the dynamics in a pre-cluster. Both papers advanced what we know in cool ways.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.7030 is an IceCube paper about looking for softer energy jets from Supernovae. The basic idea is that these jets will create neutrinos closer to the explosion, and should do so in higher quantity than more energetic jets. The goal is to look for multiple neutrinos from the same direction within 100 seconds of each other. The paper is solid, with great explanations of how it all works. Once again IceCube comes up with a null result (so far), becuase this search is on the limit of what it could be expected to detect.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.7245 is about the first release of data (publicly available at a website they give you) of 2008 millimeter wavelength observations from the South Pole Telescope. The paper is about the characteristics of the telescope, and an overview of what was observed. It is cool that the actual observational data is open for us to play with... even if it is three years old.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.7147 is about the next generation of Ground-based Gravitational Wave detectors at LCGT, LIGO, and VIRGO which will be collecting data in 2017 or there abouts. More specifically, this paper is about a subsytem of LCGT for optical work... that is this paper is about the instrument and the science of how it works, and not about the science that should result from its operation. Personally I love knowing how these things work, and what tricks it takes to get beyond current capabilities.
Forming opinions as we speak
From 2 December 2011
Today has lots of papers about distant galaxies, and about quasars, blazars, and other SMBHs. There are a few papers about variable stars changing periods, and several about simulation software packages. These are all pretty cool, but there were nine papers that caught me more than the rest:
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.0244 Oh Man! I will make more time to read this one more thoroughly later today. This is a paper I've been dreaming about for twenty years. Ultra High Energy Cosmic Rays (UHECRs) are supposed to get their paths bent by galactic and intergalactic magnetic fields, and are supposed to get slowed down by various interactions with lower energy stuff in the cosmos (such as CMB photons)... OK, so how far away can we tell the source, and in marginal cases, how are the different species of cosmic ray affected by these fields and backgrounds? ... and what can we learn about the structure and intensity of the nearby intergalactic magnetic fields? This paper answers these questions! Better resolution answers may come in the future, but for now, looking at UHECRs from Centaurus A, we have answers.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.0004 is about MKIDs. These are new technology focal plane arrays for UV, Optical, and near IR, made of super-conductors. These devices are able to record the time and energy of every photon to hit an element (capturing 20% to 80% of all photons depending on energy). Right now it is being tested on the 200 inch Hale telescope, but it is a small array you wouldn't use for imaging. In the near future they are hoping to make arrays with much larger numbers of elements, and for the elements to be more uniform. Having the ability to have fast transients not be lost in CCD bins, and for the same imaging detector also supply spectroscopic information seems like a huge advance.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.0016 This paper's title is a little bait-and-switch. It asks a question about a very bright massive Wolf-Rayet star discovered in the LMC near the incredibly bright massive R136 cluster. This star is hidden behind a lot of dust and gas, and the paper's title asks if this could be a progenitor of a Dark GRB... the paper concludes that it can't. However the paper is very interesting discussing why. It looks at how high rotation leads to chemically homogenous evolution of the star, and how THIS star might have all that so far, but is losing angular momentum rapidly as it sheds mass. This paper was great in that it presented the current model of Long GRBs and applied it to a nearby observable star.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.0018 This is the paper about the Christmas GRB from last year being a comet hitting a collapsed star of some sort. It was all over the press yesterday, so not much to say here.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.0036 Is a comparison of Suzaku observations of the SMBHs at the centers of NGC3783 (which has a high spin), and for Fairall 9 (which has a low spin for an accreting black hole). The paper was an interesting read for several reasons, including it being a nice primer on modern methods of determing the spin of an SMBH. It also gave a good set of graphs showing the luminosity of spinning accreting black holes as a function of how close the BH is to the maximum spin rate (Slow spinning ones aren't as bright, so we have an observational bias toward detecting the fast ones).
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.0138, http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.0143, and http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.0155 are papers resulting from a study of Bok globule B335 which is about 100 parsecs from here. The papers use this globule to examine with modern tools everything we can learn about these dark spots in the sky, including how far away they are, how much the extinguish light from behind them in varying frequencies, and its mass and composition. I have always wondered about these things. In the old days we used to think these were single solar systems forming. Fred Hoyle's best known fiction effort was about one of these. They look intriguing in astrophotographs. Here's the best we can say about them wrapped up in three readable papers. Thanks to the Olofssons.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.0299 What is Object 7? (something that may or may not have been a supernova in 1961). Back then we didn't have Hubble and Spitzer. I like mysteries. This paper describes one.
Forming opinions as we speak
From 5 December 2011
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.0313 looks for the mechanism that causes galaxies to change from star-forming to quiescent (stars still form, but at about 10% the rate). The paper does this by looking at the size of such galaxies that still have young hot stars at various redshifts, and strangely observes more small galaxies than expected at higher (z~2) redshifts... conclusion: more mergers as a factor than thought before this study. This is interesting to me simply as an observer to the back-and-forth about galaxy formation.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.0317 is about turbulance in the interstellar medium slowing down, or preventing the collapse of the medium into starless cores. The paper is long and heavy on the math (as are all fluid-dynamics papers). It looks at potential cooling mechanisms, and compares high to low turbulance systems. One thing that this paper didn't cover explicitly, but I think is an important follow-through on this arena is the importance of macroscopic turbulance to the formation of close doubles, and hot Jupiters... but it is a start, and a good read.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.0438 is about Dark Matter distribution in the local group's dwarfs, and http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.0319 is about the distribution within the Fornax Dwarf in particular. As in a study of a different dwarf a few months ago, this paper finds the distribution in Fornax is not cuspy. ... as a related factor IF Fornax has a central black hole, it is not much larger than ten thousand times the mass of the Sun. A lot of lay people ask questions about what is dark matter, and how did it get here, and this paper gives new clues that are still several steps away from an answer to that. Actually a lot also ask how do we know it is really there, which this paper contributes yet another solid example.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.0327 is a look ahead to the next generation of x-ray telescopes, and how they will be able to help us measure Dark Energy by looking at the xrays from distant galaxy clusters. Dark energy is something people ask about, and the current answer is basically it is there, but we don't know much about it... it looks like it might be Einstein's cosmological constant... Here we look ahead to a non-SN1a mechanism to measure it with some accuracy.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.0403 some papers are looking so far away that they seem esoteric. This one is a simple paper looking at Baily's Beads in a 2010 Solar eclipse. Baily's Beads are something we see when the sun first starts shining through the valley on the edge of the moon (as wee see it). In this paper they look at limb darkening (brightness function of the edge of the Sun) and conclude that historic old records about where and when ecplipses were obeserved, and hence the relative positions of the Moon and Sun for various geographic locations might need to be adjusted slightly. This is a cool paper that any of us could have measured and calculated with fairly cheap equipment.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.0509 is a long complicated paper about the various foregrounds observed in the WMAP7 data. I can't do it complete justice here, but it is very interesting to me to see what we think is contaminating the microwave view of the deep background. The CMB is so important to our understanding of everything. My hat's off to the people who sift through this stuff.
Forming opinions as we speak
From 6 December 2011
I'm a little pressed for time today, so only four. Of the many I skipped, the big topics today seemed to be: Transiting Exoplanets (lots of CoRoT stuff), Stellar winds, including from pulsating stars, Gravitational Waves, and galaxy central bulges. Surprisingly, nothing about the nearby (336 million ly) 21 Billion solar mass black hole... which will be the third largest one we can see in terms of angular size seen from here.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.0566 is about detecting the locations of various molecular species in the close vicinity of Sgr A*, and making some initial conclusions about the processes that must be going on near there for these things to form faster than they are being destroyed. Nice pictures. Easy reading. Fun to think about.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.0568 is a simulation of a black hole - neutron star merger, with magnetism taken into effect. These is a somewhat worn topic... there are a lot of such simulations, but the images are inspiring to look at, and how could you not love thinking about this? ... and the conclusion about what the various detectors at our end would see are also reassuring.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.0827 as some of you may be aware from articles in the popular press, there is a serious discussion going on about dropping the leap-second (and perhaps having a leap-minute once every forty years or so). This paper is about a systems engineering approach to civil time-keeping around the world. I was hoping for something more all-encompassing, but this paper limits itself to timekeeping on this planet. Still, what he does is lay down groundwork for solving the problem(s), not actually solve them. Important step.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.1053 is about the Deep Core (next phase) addition to IceCube, which the authors describe as a scientific success. This caught me because I've seen IceCube as having produced interesting results, but much fewer of them than I originally imagined it would. I'm interested in seeing where they go from here, and what to hope for along those lines.
Forming opinions as we speak
From 7 December 2011
Magnetism... Wow, who'd have expected that many papers on magnetism, magnetic objects, magnetohydrodynamics, and other related topics. I picked one magnetism paper, but took things on other topics mostly.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.1075 is a great paper about Pulsar Timing Arrays which will be used for finding monochromatic gravitational wave sources ... i.e. inspiralling SMBHs. I've seen quite a few papers before about PTAs, but this one has been great in showing the details and exclusions of how this will work... for example, I didn't know that they need three times as many pulsars being observed as GW sources detected. I didn't know that we will need to continously monitor all of those pulsars for ten years or so to get good clean data. The paper has some math (mostly trig), but also comes with pictures.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.1078 this is the paper about the two nearby giant black holes that were all over the press a couple days ago. This paper comes with a lot more information about how these objects were confirmed and measured, as well as providing some nice images and graphs that mean something to us, but not the general public.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.1106 is a non-mainstream paper that takes a look at the idea that at very large distance scales, magnetism might not follow the Maxwell's equations as written, but might have some small-coefficient higher order terms that could potentially account for Dark Matter and Dark Energy. (Kind of like MoND for Magnetism) I'm not a supporter of the idea, but I admire people who take an outside-the-box idea like this and do the math required to make it work.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.1167 is a very short easy-to-read paper about an experiment to try and detect Axions (as Dark Matter). Such an experiment has already been done by this team, using very cold SQUIDs, and turned up nothing in a small zone of possible masses. This paper describes a new effort that will run at colder temperatures, and hopefully cover a range of masses three or four times as wide. As I've noted before, I'm still not a believer in Axions as Dark Matter because I don't see how they can lose enough energy to be gravitationally confined to galaxies... but some day I'll see a paper that explains that part to me. In the mean time, I want to know the state of that science.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.1188 is a cool short paper, in which they've taken recently observed proper motion data of the LMC and SMC, and combined with radial velocity data and the mass distribution of the Milky Way have calculated orbits for these two galaxies.
Forming opinions as we speak
From 8 December 2011
Today's papers are fairly diverse, including several about inspiralling material in viscous disks around black holes. There's also a fair number of papers about AGNs, Gravitational Waves, hot gasses, and a few about clusters of stars. Interesting day.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.1514 is the paper about imaging SS Leporis with the VLTI that got some press yesterday. Not much to add here, but it is fun to see images of stars in orbit so close that the star shape is distorted. I've seen it in paintings, but never an actual image. Cool.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.1506 is a paper taking a new look at the Drake Equation (number of current cultures in the galaxy). This paper extends it by making it a function of time so that we can estimate the number of cultures in the galaxy at different times since the formation of the Milky Way. The paper doesn't give a number, but it is a very fun topic, and easy to read... especially in this day when we are getting solid numbers for estimating the number of habitable planets.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.1419 is about a cluster of bright blue stars surrounding the SMBH in M31 (Andromeda, the nearest big galaxy). It is interesting that massive blue stars seem to form near the SMBHs in galaxies. In this case the orbiting blue stars are going between 1/3rd and 2/3rds of a percent of the speed of light around the center, and they all seem to have formed between one and two hundred million years ago. Whether these are stars that formed from some active event in M31, or whether they aren't what they appear and are simply normal stars that had outer layers stripped by the SMBH, and now look younger and hotter is still a topic for debate.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.1640 is the paper about Kepler-22b, the super-Earth in a habitable (Goldielocks) zone. The press has covered this pretty heavily. It's nice to have the original paper, so you can see the graphs and images too esoteric for the lay public, and see the details of the measurements.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.1655 is a short and sweet paper about looking at GRB afterglows in the most detail our current fleet of tools has to offer. The paper conludes nothing about physics, only about observational limits, but it is great to have a clear sense of what can be observed within those limits, so you can make your own estimate of what can be known with today's technology, and be able to guess what comes in the future.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.1416 We look at secondary evidence to map out the dark matter in galaxies. These methods include weak lensing (shape distorting) of background elliptical galaxies, and the motion of stars and clusters at different distances from the center... This paper proposes and employs a new method that seems to work during tidal interactions between galaxies. This method is to observe the disturbance of the atomic Hydrogen gas orbiting the galaxy. To me this method seems like it is a bit limited as to how often it can be used, but has a lot of promise to give corroborating details in the few cases that it can work to strongly support and refine our observations elsewhere.
Forming opinions as we speak
From 9 December 2011
Odd day on arXiv. Lots of papers about relatively normal stars and galaxies. I picked out five papers today.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.1700 Looks at the complete list of 53 long GRBs for which we have solid redshift data that were brighter than a couple of x-ray photons per square cm at the peak second... and observes that the universe is evolving, and clearly there were more of these things from z=1.5 to 4 (or more) than there are now, and that they used to be more energetic events than they are now. The assumption is that star formation rates and metalicity are the reasons. Every once in a while I still get someone trying to tell me that the universe is infinitely old and steady state, and the the expansion we observe is an illusion due to some new physics or other. This is one more nail in the coffin for those ideas.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.1725 tells all we know about a nearby Sun-like star with an L-Dwarf (brown dwarf) orbiting it with a seventy year orbit not quite as excentric as Halley's comet, but still very eccentric. We have speckle pictures showing the BD, we have high precision velocity measurements of the host star to observe the effect of the orbit. We have very good (within about 1%) parallax measurements, and twenty years of close observation from Lick and Keck. It's cool to see how nailed down we have this.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.1880 is a paper trying to provide more detail on an interesting way to tell what kinds of matter are on the insides of neutron stars (Hadrons, Hyperons, or Quark-matter)? Some studies use magnetic fields, some use frequency of star-quakes, but this one uses Cooling Curves, which is perhaps the one with the best chance of showing us real-time changes. *Side note*: we aren't interested in what's in them because we want to go get some. This is a test of some fine tuning of quantum chromodynamics, and the overall equation of state of the interior.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.1884 M87 is a nearby giant elliptical galaxy with a jumbo sized central black hole. It also has a large number of globular cluster which this paper uses to both look at the merger history of this galaxy (at least for large mergers), and to look at the dark matter distribution in this galaxy. The paper is pretty long and low on images (nice graphs though). The conlusion is something I've wanted to know.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.1899 Loop Quantum Gravity ... This paper (which I have barely even skimmed, but will get to later today while hanging out in an airport looking for intellectual adventure) is about Loop Quantum Gravity (A theory so alternative that Sheldon forbade Leonard to date a woman who believed in it) and its predictions about Gravitational Waves (and other deformations of space-time) and how they will be observed differently from the proedictions of straight-up General Relativity. The paper also looks at the earliest moments of the Universe, and claims to resolve the Entropy problem. Cool paper! believe it if you dare.
Forming opinions as we speak
From 12 December 2011
On a day that brings news of an untra-long GRB (GRB-111209A), news of NASA plans for landing on Europa, and just two days away from hearing the official news on the Higgs particle being discovered (or not), there were surprisingly few papers in arXiv. Still there were some cool papers. There were several about the gasses in and around galaxies, and galaxy mergers. There seems to be at least one paper about cataclismic variables every day, adn today was no exception... here's my top six:
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.1954 Neptune's orbit, and the orbits in the Kuiper Belt are a topic that comes up now and again. I think of it as soft-core astronomy. New simulations. New calculations. New observations... This paper looks at how Neptune probably got its orbit, adn also looks at the probably distribution of the KBOs kicked to the KB to help Neptune get there. Graphs, Timelines, and math. All the right stuff for a fairly easy to read paper that leaves me feeling more certain I understand how this all happened.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.2008 Right now, we are identifying exoplanets by observing brightness dips from transits of planets across the stars face. This can tell is the duration of the orbit, and usually the diameter of the planet (as a ratio of the diameter of the star). This paper looks ahead to measurements we should be able to make with JWST and PLATO (future missions) that take a closer look at the light curves from the transits in such a way that can also reveal the planet's mass. I like looking ahead to what we might know soon.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.2041 is a paper about high velocity outflow of material (Carbon Monoxide in particular is the stuff being traced) from Young Stellar Objects. Now this paper is pretty cool in that it is another snapshot of the young star sequence. Some nice charts are presented. The paper caught my eye in particular because the submillimeter array had come up in conversation over the weekend... and here it is producing great new science.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.2088 Wait a minute! This paper is about 13 metal-poor hypervelocity stars (all type F) that are in the Sloan Digital Sky Survey. Now of these, seven are coming from the galactic center, but the others? Four from the galactic disk, and two from who knows where (escaped from a dwarf during a tidal interaction?)? OK, the paper is cool simply for showing the speed and direction these things are going in (BTW, hypervelocity means they will escape the Milky Way and spend their white dwarf years cruising the cosmos unfettered by a nearby galaxy). The thing that caught *my* eye was the fact that these are metal-poor stars. It says something that F stars (which can only live a couple billion years on the main sequence) are coming out of the core of the Milky Way (presumably as a catapulted former smaller member of a close double interacting with Sgr A*) but somehow are metal-poor. WHERE did the gas making up those stars come from? Clearly they are from a mostly unsullied infalling cloud, but how did that get to the center? ... the paper doesn't explain THAT mystery, because the mystery of the origin of the others is equally puzzling.
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1112.2151 and more generally http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.2158 are a couple more papers about the prospects of pulsar helping to observe the otherwise unobservable (so far). In the first paper we look at how the SKA may be able to let us find pulsars in close orbits around Sgr A* to help make very precise tests of General Relativity (Frame dragging, no hair, etc). The second is simply an overview of how great PTAs are going to be.
Forming opinions as we speak
From 13 December 2011
I'm distracted, because as I write this, the press conference about the Higgs particle is half an hour away. arXiv today had lots of papers about LAT's various searches for Dark Matter near particular objects, and a few papers about where we should see neutralino dark matter... including one that I didn't include here about DM orbiting compact stellar remnants (neutron stars & black holes) after having been trapped in the much larger core of the star. There were also several papers about jets from young stars, micro-quasars, and other things... All great stuff, but I had Higgs on the mind.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.2210 Nice! This is a paper I expect you'll see other bloggers covering, and perhaps even the press (who will also be distracted by Higgs). This is about the apparent discovery and analysis of light echos from Eta Carina's twenty year outburst from 170 to 150 years ago... These are distant light echos! and even more fascinating they looked at the spectra of the echoed light to determine characteristics of this outburst, and found cooler temps than expected. This is a very easy-to-read visually interesting paper.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.2237 is about an area with a massive protostellar core called Mol160 (a Molecular cloud). This area was studied in the far infrared for the flow of various molecular and atomic species through the cloud, and to get information about the mass of the core. Nothing unexpected discovered, but the whole observation is another snapshot in star formation.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.2349 dust gets blown out of the center of the protoplanetary disks when things get hot in the star. This paper is about how dust might get trapped in the outer reaches of the Protoplanetary disk, and perhaps even collect into larger lumps there. (simulations and observations)
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.2430 caught my eye because of the game *Risk*, and the fact that this Atmospheric Cherenkov Array is in *Yakutsk*. I like these Cherenkov telescopes... so it is easy for such a paper to catch my eye. This paper is looking at the spectrum observed in Yakutsk, but it is also about the weather there... and what months they get clear skies. One important thing about this paper is that it showed that the relative sensativity of this detector in the 10^18 eV range is different (and perhaps better) than that of other such detectors. It was fun reading about the setup of this relatively new device.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.2659 is about the Higgs particle, and how if it has a mass of about 126 (+/- 4) GeV, that back when the universe was so dense that the average energy was 10^24 eV, a local minimum could have formed resulting in tunneling and inflation (good for cosmolgists, bad for bankers and economists). This paper is heavy on the math, but worth plowing through as one good reason (out of many) to like today's announcement as a stepping stone to future science.
Forming opinions as we speak
From 14 December 2011
There was a pretty good haul of papers on mind-grabbing topics. Several about KBOs, some on pair-instability SN, and seeds for SMBHs, proposed new equipment, the sun and sunlike stars, the state of astronomy in general, and a big batch about *Virtual Observatory*. It would be nice to have time to read them all. I picked seven today:
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.2706 I've been around the dial so many times but you're not there... One third of our local baryons are missing! This is a paper that looks at the census of all the baryons observed in the local universe, and finds that we are short a significant fraction. Using charts and graphs, this paper shows the results of various searches, and tells us how much of the local mass is in various forms (i.e. galaxies contain about 7% of the baryons)... Actually it was the last pie-chart that sold me on this paper. It brings some specifics about quatities that I could only wave my hands about prior to reading it.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.2711 Initial Mass Function in the Orion Nebula... This seems like such an obvious thing to try and measure. Here's the closest star forming region in the universe, and we have the ability to make parallax distance measurements to it... This whole process of how stars form is a statistical science among other things... and here's almost two thousand fresh examples.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.2772 I mentioned above that there were a lot of papers today on *Virtual Observatory*. This is one. This is more of a purpose piece, describing how the advent of the great new instruments in astronomy have pulled our attention away from the old-fashioned stellar astronomy, and turned it to more cosmological sources... and in studying the issue, they have come up with a mechanism to increase the efficiency of observing stars, and to lower the hurdles for turning out good research in this field. VO is their tool, and as someone who wonders about things as a hobby, I may start using it.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.2882 Do you remember comet P/2010 A2 LINEAR? I do (vaguely)... but when I saw the pictures in this paper I remembered it vividly. This was identified as a probable event in which an inner belt asteroid obliquely collided with a smaller object and sprayed dust all over the place... looking like an odd shaped comet. This is the first of a series of followup papers on this object. It is a fun read.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.3016 is a paper about *Sail-driven starships* using directed energy to accelerate them. As far as I can tell the author is not affiliated with any academic or professional institution, but he had a good idea, and elaborated it in some detail in a paper and here it is. Nice work James! I hope we can try your idea out soon.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.3017 OK, so the two big particles the press was covering the search for were the Higgs intermediate vector boson and the Neutralino. The first gives strong support to the idea of a Higgs field, and completes the standard model of particle physics. The second would be the first observed particle from a new branch of particle physics broadly referred to as Supersymmetry (a place holder for several related models) that could possibly explain some odd things we've observed about particle interactions. *This paper* looks at the impact that having observed the Higgs boson at 126 GeV has on the searches for the Neutralino. This is cool stuff to know.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.2758 Arrgghh! I don't know Gibson, but Schild I am familiar with. I believe that he is working on the idea of testing the limits of what people will believe. His papers seem to me to be word salads close to containing a narative, but basically mimicing the form of real papers. *Is it humor?* Is it a public service to keep us watching for other montebanks in our midst? This paper asks if Dark Energy is falsifiable... but goes on to talk about the unknown without benefit of confirming numbers... and references several dozen other Schild papers. I don't plan to read many of his papers, but it is good to be able to recognize them when friends are confused by him.
Forming opinions as we speak
(By far, the speculative science presentations were the most popular in terms of absolute audience attendance. I didn't bother with any of them. I spent the entire symposium in the real science propulsion room. Much smaller room...but a room full of extremely sharp people. Sharp as knives.)
From 15 December 2011
As always, there are lots of great papers, but today there was one that caught my attention so intently that I short-changed all the others. That one is about the gas cloud that is going to interact with Sgr A* in 2013 (and for about 20 years after that). I saw the video in blogs yesterday, and it occupied my wall street (to coin a term). So aside from this, there were more papers than usual about cosmic shear today, and a few about the lower rungs of the distance scale (one of which I discuss here), and aside from that, the usual distribution of topics.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.3264 is it! A gaseous blob about three times the mass of the Earth will pass about 3000 times as far from Sgr A* as its event horizon is from the center... and by that I mean that its center will pass that close. Some fraction of that material will get disturbed in its orbit enough to fall into the SMBH over the next few decades. In radio, this will be an incredible opportunity to learn details about event horizons that are only theorized now... we need to get that new equipment built and tested.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.3038 Cepheids are the second link in our distance scale after stellar parallax. This is a paper about refining further our knowledge of their brightness at various colors based on factors such as period and metalicity. This is important stuff. Once the the Overwhelming Large Telescope, and other 25-meter-plus telescopes get online, we'll be using Cepheids to confirm distances to many more galaxies, and having a number within a percent or so will be very comforting.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.3093 and http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.3162 are papers about source-finders for interferometric radio arrays... particularly loking ahead to the SKA Pathfinder in Australia. This caught me because I didn't realize a source-finder was required. In my mind, we just pointed the array, and collected data. So this paper delighted both my interest in the hardware we're building AND my desire to know the whole process better.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.3116 is a paper about modeling Dark Matter Halos using three parameters instead of the traditional two (a la NFW & Moore), and getting much closer results to what is observed. This is a paper I'm going to have to look at later, as I only skimmed it so far, but this seems important to me based on the number of times people claim to think DM is hooey because halos don't look right.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.3165 Gamma rays and radio are both beign emitted from pulsars... and the light curves match up. This is a paper that compares them and explores what that means about the sources of both kinds of photons, and what that means about the collapsed body radiating this stuff. I've often wondered about this, and here it is.
Forming opinions as we speak
Awesome thread, Antoniseb. I don't have time to peruse Archives like I use to, and this is by many parsecs the best Reader's Digest version
Thanks Jerry ... This has been an on again off again effort of mine for a long time, but this RD version has been fun.
From 16 December 2011 (Beethoven's Birthday)
There are more papers about the Sun than usual today (One really caught my attention), there are also a few more than usual about neutron stars. Aside from that, cool papers on topics related to jets from various sources, computer methods for simulations, and lots about the Higgs particle (most of which also discuss implications for SUSY). Maybe I'm too tired to be inspired, but only three caught my eye today.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.3388 Back on 9 Apr 2008 there was a CME (called the Cartwheel CME) that was observed by many simultaneous telescopes from many directions. This paper is an analysis of all the data about it, and a three-dimensional reconstruction of the prominence it came from... This long paper has a lot of cool images, and is long on explanations that told me a lot about the state of solar science.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.3591 (Pardon my French) This paper is about the atmospheres of exoplanets, brown dwarfs, and stars (red dwarfs mostly) as modelled by some new software. The paper is written by native French speakers, but if you ignore the frankish mispellings, the paper itself is great. The paper says that its purpose is to prepare the way for analysis from upcoming new telescopes and Gaia.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.3635 I am a big fan if the history of astronomy. This paper is about a technique that William Herschal used to map the Milky Way. Herschal made a set of assumptions about the uniformity of stars (which he calle star gages), and from this he made a fairly obviously incorrect map of the galaxy... This is a great narrative.
Forming opinions as we speak
I'd say thanks antoniseb, but you get me in trouble for spending too much time on the computer, every time you post in this thread. Well, thanks for getting me in trouble, how's that?
From 19 December 2011
I'm finding it a little difficult to categorize the papers I'm skipping today. There were quite a few that had to do with observing aspects of galaxies at z>1, including metalicity, wind, and other details. There are of course the usual papers exploring outside the box ideas for Dark Matter and/or Dark Energy. There's a few on gravitational waves as well. Over the last couple of weeks, there have been some gloriously visual papers. Today, I'm picking five fairly detailed topics.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.3656 This paper looks at an extended Lyman alpha halo around a QSO at z=6.4 using a spectrograph at Keck. The QSO is a radio quiet central black hole with a mass about a quarter billion times the mass of the Sun. The Lyman alpha spectrum is coming from a few tens of kiloparsecs around the center (i.e. an area about the size of the Milky Way). The paper discusses the source of this emission (infalling gas into the galaxy, ubiquitous young stars, other options), and points this kind of measure out as an important tool for understanding the early galaxy-forming universe. Also amusing, after submission, the authors were informed that a similar paper on the same QSO had already been posted. This paper does have some new measure and discusssion.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.3667 The solar corona is hotter than anything around it. Why doesn't it radiate energy and collapse? This paper looks into heating and radiating mecahnisms in the corona. Its nice to get a fresh look at this topic.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.3736 This paper looks at sixteen young stellar objects whose diskd are seen edge on to us, and in the infrared looks for information about where (what distances) water-ice exists in abundance in those disks. The paper itself is mostly about the methods used to make the measurements, but the conlusions are important data points in the larger picture of having good hard numbers in the models of how planets form.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.3897 and http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.3901 These are essentially the same paper, except that the first one has been stripped of much of its math and is targetted to a wider audience. These papers look at the constraints on our models of inflation placed by the assumption of the creation of magnetic fields during this inflation process. This is interesting to me because we are not quite yet at a point where we can map the intergalactic magnetic fields, but a paper a few weeks ago (about cosmic rays from Cen A) showed that we are starting to get there. These papers about cosmic magnetic fields, and such measurements have the potential to give us strong constraints on the nature of inflation within the next twenty-thirty years.
Forming opinions as we speak
From 20 December 2012
So maybe today is clusters day. There are a lot of papers about open clusters, galaxy clusters, globular clusters (actually not so many about them). There are also quite a few papers about Dark Matter halos, dark matter observations, and dark energy. On top of all this are a bunch of papers about surveys, about GRBs, and about neutron stars. I only took a few of these, and also picked up a few quirky ones.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.4269 You'll see this one covered in the mainstream press. This is about the apparent discovery of a Jupiter mass planet in an eight-year orbit around an eclipsing binary star. I wish we had images of this thing... I wish we had images from near this thing... dramatic scenery of a planet and two suns. It was discovered by careful timing of the eclipses, not by direct observation of any kind.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.3959 is about the halo of M87 (not dark matter specificly). The study is looking at ways to tell something about the recent merger history that went into forming this giant galaxy. They do this by looking at the phase-space (i.e. simply taking position and momentum into account) of the globular clusters in the system. The team ran a lot of simulations to see if they could reproduce the current configuration, and conclude that there have been two substantial mergers in the last 1.5 billion years (one recent, one early), and that 1.5 billion years might be near the limit of how far back this technique can look. This kind for astro-forensics is interesting to me. I want to know the frequency and results of galaxy merger, since I'm not confident that all large galaxies started small.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.3999 is about the Synchronous Network of distant Telescopes (SNT) spread across the Eastern Hemisphere. This is NOT an interferometry effort. This is an effort to be able to maintain continual and high time-resolution observations of sky phenonena. This facility has been around for more than 10 years, but is not in the press much. This paper looks at a few results from this instrument, which really have no parallel in the rest of what I've been reading in arXiv for direct observations. These observations are of transient events in active stars, including red dwarf flares, and how their spectra change over the course of several minutes. I am much in favor of the new giant telescopes getting built, but we also need more tools like this. (Short easy-to-read)
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.4329 Claims of new physics can be interesting, or perhaps a fun puzzle to see if you can unravel it with things you know (without using things you only believe). *"Outstreaming solar axions with a rest mass of ~17 meV can explain solar X-ray activity being enhanced above the magnetized photosphere"* ... OK, this paper is looking at evidence for Axions (new physics) by looking at white-light solar flares, and xrays from the corona. I'm interested in understanding why Axions keep coming up as solutions to things (like Dark Matter), for which to me they are an anti-intuitive fit. This paper is yet another example. In this case they are using the heavy version of Axions... the DM Axions are usually assumed to be a few micro-eV.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.4171 is a paper looking at Fermi-LAT results looking for evidence of dark matter (neutralino) self annihilation in the galactic halo, and attempting to put new (lower) upper bounds on how many of these annihilations occur. The paper makes the case for some fairly strict limits on the cross-section (likelihood) of these annihilations.
Forming opinions as we speak
From 21 December 2011 (one year before the end of another Mayan Calendar Cycle)
There are a lot of papers today... I suppose it must be end of the semester freedom to work on something other than grading papers and having office hours. There were some great papers about phases in the formation of neutron stars, and other issues related to the NS equation of state. Aside from that I can't really characterize the other papers... just too diverse. I selected ten papers.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.4514 and http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.4550 are papers about Kepler-20 and the two roughly Earth-sized planet rcently discovered.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.4506 Speaking of Kepler, this paper is about Kepler observations of a couple of Cataclysmic Varables having 64 outbursts over about two years. These stars are each double in the form of white dwarfs receiving material into an accretion disk from gas escaping the roche lobe of an M or K dwarf close companion. These CVs tend to have a series of smaller outbursts followed by a superburst once or twice a year. What is really cool about the Kelper data is that it has very accurate time data about these outbursts with no missed outbursts. We see a lot of consistent variations between the size, spacing, and shape of the bursts, that will constrain current models of what goes on in the accretion disks of these systems. Future analysis is needed.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.4506 and http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.4479 are papers from my G+ friend @Matthew Turk (et al.) basically the same paper twice, but the second one has an add-on. The paper look at magnetic fields in the first stars in the universe (Pop III Stars), which may have been giant non-metallic stars. These papers are simulations run at various levels of granularity, looking out to about 1000 AU from the star. The papers include some very evocative images. To some degree this paper is about comparing results of the different granularity (64 per Jeans length is the max they try) to see how the results vary, I presume so as to get funding for more detailed sims. But it also show something unexpected... that the magnetic field can suppress accretion disk formation, and result in more efficient inflow into the star. I didn't see it in the paper, but it made me wonder if extreme cases of this mechanism might be responsible for the seeds that formed the SMBHs.
Post Edit: I have gotten some feedback from one of the authors above that they are working on higher granularity simulations, and that their work is in more ways about turbulence than I've indicated above (i.e. I missed the mark a bit in my reading and short description). In any case, it is a very cool thing they are working on.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.4747 is a paper observing erratic jet wobbling in my old favorite OJ287 (the double quasar). This is possibly going to give a new laboratory for the direct study of the Lense-Thirring effect on a massive scale... hard to say. I only skimmed the conclusions, but will be reading it in detail this afternoon.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.4581 and http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.4596 are papers about very young stars. In the first they discuss limits on gas disks surrounding later stages of T Tauri stars (Evolved T Tauri). In the second we look much younger to the earliest observed jet (well just outflow really) from a pre-stellar core. Both are cool glimpses into how stars develop.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.4789 is about a luminosity problem in low-mass star formation. I looked at this because of my current curiosity about what mass of star eventually settles down to be no brighter than Jupiter reflecting sunlight... and though this might add some parameters to the answer... but no, this is more interesting than that, and really fits in with the two above, in that it is a study of what we can, should, and do observe in low mass pre-stellar objects, and how those ideas need some small adjustments.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.4478 is a paper about combining weak lensing surveys with red shift surveys and seeing what additional types of data we can expect to get about the universe. (I'll be reading this in more detail later, so I have little to say now... it might be a bore. )
Last edited by antoniseb; 2011-Dec-21 at 04:41 PM.
Forming opinions as we speak
From 22 December 2011
Today had more papers on jets, flows, and the sheaths, boundaries, and magnetic properties of them than usual. Aside from that, we had quite a few on the usual exciting topics. But among them were six that grabbed me:
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.5043 We have a good idea, based on theory how large and massive various stars are... but there is a bit of variation in theories. O, B, and even A stars are a little harder to give numbers for, since they don't really have sharp distinct spectral lines that we can observe to tell us things (for example changing relative velocity with a companion). This paper is about attempts to nail down some of these things in giant stars, including measuring their angular diameters to within a few percent using the VLTI-AMBER interferometer. The paper also looks at what we do and don't know about metalicity in these lineless stars.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.5084 Aerogels have lots of uses in science... and my geeky side likes them as a cool substance with otherworldly properties. This paper is about a technique that allows the creation of aerogels with a broad range of densities and refractive indexes (for Cherenkov Ring studies in this case). So I had to read it.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.4841 Speaking of strange substances, this paper is about the interstellar medium (which non-scientists think is a vacuum). It is (of course) made of very thin gas (plasma), and it behaves in ways similar enough to earthly gases that common fluidynamics words to describe what it does... its just that on Earth, things gases do in minutes take millions of years between the stars. This paper is about how anisotropic thermal conductivity of these thin gases affects thermal instability.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.4870 Heavy elements have their nuclei assembled in the r-process (r stands for rapid). That's the best model we have. I don't know of any specific observation where we've seen direct evidence of Gold creation happening live in a young supernova, but where else can this stuff come from? This paper uses the VLT to look at Thorium abundances in metal-poor (old) stars, to get e sense of where the r-process foundaries in the early galaxy were located. Years ago, I just accepted that different stars have different trace element abundances. It is really cool to live in an age when the specifics of which stars have how much can begin to tell us new details about the early history of the galaxy, and the nature of the early stars.
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1112.5045 Something huge if it doesn't get overturned... written by a single author, so don't bet your head. This paper looks at all quasars in the Sloan DSS with redshifts 2.2>z>0.2 (75,000 of them spread across the whole sky). He slices the sky into bins of right asscension and declination, and discovers that there is a correlation between RA&D and quasar brightness for a given redshift, suggesting that if we see the quasars as isotropic, we must be headed in one direction at 0.2 c (a hundred times faster than our peculiar velocity relative to the CMB). He also says that our direction lines up with the axis of evil.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.4903 Some day we will or won't detect gravitational waves, and some models of gravity will bite the dust. This is a paper about how Gravitational Radiation might be observed if Brans-Dicke theory (which looks like General Relativity in local non-extreme space) is a better model for this aspect of the universe. We are a few years (or maybe decades) away from being able to make precise, quantifiable, regular, systematic observations of Gravitational Waves from numerous sources. I want to see the predictions made by the several fleshed out alternatives to GR, and this paper kinda gives me one (buried in some deep math).
Forming opinions as we speak
Great thread, especially for those on the run like me. Thanks.
From 23 December 2011
Today I am very short on time, so I'm only discussing three papers. The overall set today deserve more, but I have outside constraints. I skipped the various dusty disk papers including a very cool one about the double pulsar's orbital decay. I skipped the two new Virtual Observatory papers. I also skipped lots of papers about the Sun, about the s-process (having covered r-process yesterday), and several on shapes of dwarf galaxies. Great day, no time.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.5207 Is about te likelihood of observing pair-instability supernovae from the first stars using the JWST. The paper concludes that we should see between 0.4 and 2 PISNs per frame shot by JWST with exposure times over about 6 hours. One entertaining issue that this paper discusses is that even though Supernaove normally have light curves observable for several months to a year or so depending on how deep you want to follow it, PISNs owing to their cosmological time dilation will stay bright for many years. In my opinion finding and observing these things will be great because they are the brightest aspect to the first stars, and will be able to tell us a lot about the early days of galaxies that we simply can't tell directly today.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.5224 is about isolating where the flares around Sgr A* are coming from, using the VLBI. Similar papers were published in 2009 about flares in 2007, using the same arrangement of baselines and telescopes. The results are not surprizing, but they are pleasantly confirming the models that we have for this 4.1 million solar mass object, and the thin accretion disk we see around it. These observations were made at 1.3 mm. The resolution will be even better as we get to submillimeter VLBI.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.5435 looks at the SZ effect observing clusters with the South Pole Telescope to tighten various cosmological parameters. For me, I've been putting off really trying to grasp how the SZ effect can help with this, and this paper walks us through the process. Nice work. Nice results.
Forming opinions as we speak
Hi folks, looking ahead to 2012, I'm looking for up to four partners to help keep this thread going. In my current vision, I see a different person scanning on each day of the week... though I'll work with what I get. I've seen notes from IsaacKuo, Tensor, George, and Jerry. Perhaps you guys are willing to join. If you are interested (even if you aren't on this list), send me a private message, and I'll give you enough contact info that we can work out the details.
Forming opinions as we speak
From 26 December 2011
I didn't expect there to be any new papers today. Most US institutions have today off, but there is a little under half of the normal number of papers today, and there are several that really caught me. I didn't allocate time today so I'm giving short shrift to some great work.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.5473 is details about LOFT (The Large Observatory For xray Timing). It will record xrays with 10 microsecond time-bins, and and 260 eV spectral bins. The goal is to make something that can make observations useful in constraining models of what happens near event horizons and the surfaces of neutron stars. This is proposed to launch in the early 2020s by the ESA.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.5479 Dark matter halos in clusters give important clues to how clusters formed. This paper looks at current models of cluster DM halos and how they compare with observation. The paper identifies places where more work is required to make the models right.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.5595 The Planck mission will produce some refinements over what the WMAP probe did (Cosmic Microwave Background - precision cosmology), and I'm looking forward to the release of the Planck results on that (when are they coming?). One of the kinds of foreground being removed from the Planck CMB studies is SZ effect from clusters... which itself is interesting cosmology, and this paper is results from looking at Planck SZ-observed distant clusters of galaxies using the XMM Newton Xray telescope. The comparisons allows the detection of a Malmquist bias at small angular size... a bias which is so far unquantifiable.
Forming opinions as we speak
If my memory serves me correctly, and it rarely does these days, there is a scheduled release of Planck results next month (January 2012)...watch closely - Planck had some built-in calibration routines that should not allow/require the kind of pixel-by-pixel Vogeling we endured with WMAP.
Y'all haven't taught me enough to be qualified to cul the arixv herd, not that great efforts haven't been made to rectify this issue of great impotance (ok, impotence!). Keep tryin'!
I might be able to present some papers found in Bo Reipurth's site (posted in his Star Formation Newsletter). Would this be a duplicate effort?
From 30 December 2011
Aside from Monday's small batch, there have been no papers released on arXiv this week until today... and today there was a large set. Of the ones that I'm not pointing out there were many about the Sun and sun-like stars. There were also quite a few about computation facilities for simulations. An administrative note: starting next week, I'll be doing this for two or three days of the week, and the other days will be covered by BAUT-members: Tensor, IsaacKuo, and Jerry. These guys each have a different take on astronomy's progress than I've got, but the mission is the same.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.5664 and http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.5940 are about the chances of observing a GRB at ultra high energy. The first looks at IceCube, and the second looks at Cherenkov Air-shower Telescopes. In both cases, we need luck and more observing volume.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.5681 is about observations of 99 circumstellar disks around hot young stars in a cluster, and characterizing them by stellar type. This is a pretty cool data point as we look at planet formation. http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.6181 is about the observation os a Carbon Monoxide disk at about an AU or less around a young Ae star... which again speaks to planet formation, but in this case, I think terrestrial planets, and as CO is something observable with microwave radio, our chances of being able to watch it change in real time in the near future are good.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.5815 probably only appeals to me (sorry). This is a paper about a comparison of Lanthanum-Bromide (doped with Cerium) x-ray detectors with old-fashioned Sodium-Iodide or Cesium-Iodide detectors. My work was all done with Germanium doped with Lithium detectors at liquid nitrogen temperatures (cold GeLi), and warm NaI detectors gave lines that were too wide for our use. Warm LaBr3 detectors would still not be useful for the work I did (wide peaks again), but they are useful for being 15 times faster than NaI ... AND they are a use for Lanthanum and Cerium, neither of which I hear much about practically.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.5821 There are a few sources of TeV gamma rays hitting our atmosphere. One with no observable optical counterpart has been observed in Xrays, and appears to be a pulsar wind nebula, hidden behind clouds.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.6005 and http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.6040 are about Gravitational Waves. The first is about an effort to observe inspiraling neutron stars using LIGO and VIRGO together, over a period of a month or so in late 2010, and then follow-ups were done optically (OK one followup) on the possible detections. The second paper is about using Gravitational Waves (using pulsar timing arrays) to observe inhomogeniety in the local universe (just theory, not tested yet since PTAs are still on the drawing board).
http://arxiv.org/abs/1112.6398 On January 2nd, an asteroid will pass in front of Betelgeuse (dimming it by 0.01 mag for 3.6 seconds)... if you live in Lapland to Labrador. Observing the 3 km diameter asteroid will do the reverse of what usually happens during a stellar occultation. That is we will learn more about the shape of the star than about the shape of the asteroid from the event. In this case, careful spectral observations during those 3.6 seconds, as seen from several locations may show us a picture of Betelgeuse's mottled surface.
Forming opinions as we speak
From 4 Jan 2012
I don't know who's turn it is, so there may be duplication.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1201.0726 Optimal SKA Dish Configuration using Genetic Algorithms - An interesting paper about trying to optimize the design of a sparse radio telescope array, with spatial distribution and wire length the main considerations. Lots of nice pictures, and comprehensible from the perspective of trying to solve a technical problem.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1201.0577 Using the VO to Study the Time Domain - I'm not sure I understand exactly what "Time Domain" astronomy is, and I don't know much about the Virtual Observatory. But it seems to be addressing the question, "wouldn't it be nice if there were a standardized web format for observations that could be submitted and searchable by everyone?"
http://arxiv.org/abs/1201.0370 Radial migration of the Sun in galactic disk - A lot of math which I didn't read carefully and probably wouldn't grok anyway. The bottom line is that the simulated radial migration of the Sun isn't much with a 4 arm spiral, but could be much with a 2 arm spiral. Their thrust is on how this can help characterize the Milky Way galaxy and its evolution; I find it more interesting from a perspective of implications on interstellar exploration/expansion of hypothetical early technological alien civilizations.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1201.0068 The fastest way to circle a black hole - I'm not even going to pretend to understand general relativity well enough to comprehend this paper. But it asks an irresistibly fun question. IS the fastest way to circle a black hole the minimum radius circular orbit? Spoiler - the answer is yes.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1201.0180 Thermal and Athermal Swarms of Self-Propelled Particles - An investigation of Morse swarms depending on initial conditions. These are swarms of self propelled particles with an ideal velocity and a tendency to flock with neighbors--like flocks of birds or fish. They simulate things out and provide a phase diagram of what sort of formation results.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1201.0628 Motor-Driven Bacterial Flagella and Buckling Instabilities - A detailed analysis of buckling of helical flagella and calculating the gamut of efficient locomotion. I can't help but feel this study could be helpful for nanobot design, and maybe even small robot design.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1201.0375 Gossip on Weighted Networks - An interesting model for gossip spread, taking into consideration that a person decides whether or not to spread gossip based on closeness to the victim
http://arxiv.org/abs/1201.0501 Fizeau's "aether-drag" experiment in the undergraduate laboratory - Do you want to build your own aether measuring experiment, with pipes and water pumps? This paper's right up your alley, then.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1201.0402 On proximity detection systems for pico-projectors - A short and sweet paper on whether it's worth putting proximity sensors on tiny projectors, on the theory that you could make them brighter and remain eye-safe.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1201.0384 Three-stage Origin of Life as a Result of Directional Darwinian Evolution - An odd discussion of a principle of "Increasing Independence from the Environment" as a natural direction of "progress" in evolution. This paper feels iffy to me, but the ideas are interesting anyway.
Last edited by IsaacKuo; 2012-Jan-04 at 08:28 PM.