Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Structural anisotropy”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

382 records · Page 22

Ab initio study of the electrostatic multipole nature of torsional potentials in CH3SSCH3, CH3SSH, and HOOH

The origin of torsional potentials in H3CSSCH3, H3CSSH, and HOOH and the anisotropy of the local charge distribution has been analyzed in terms of atomic multipoles calculated from the ab initio LCAO-MO-SCF wave function in the 6-31G* basis set. The results indicate that for longer -S-S-bonds the major contribution to these torsional barriers are electrostatic interactions of the atomic multipoles located on two atoms forming the rotated bond. This finding demonstrates the important role of electrostatic 1-2 interatomic interactions, usually neglected in conformational studies. It also opens the possibility to derive directly from accurate ab initio wave functions a simple nonempirical torsional potential involving atomic multipoles of two bonded atoms defining the torsional angle. For shorter -O-O- bonds, use of more precise models and inclusion of 1-3 interactions seems to be necessary.

NASA Program Exobiology↗

The Atacama Cosmology Telescope: DR6 Gravitational Lensing Map and Cosmological Parameters

We present cosmological constraints from a gravitational lensing mass map covering 9400 deg2 reconstructed from measurements of the cosmic microwave background (CMB) made by the Atacama Cosmology Telescope (ACT) from 2017 to 2021. In combination with measurements of baryon acoustic oscillations and big bang nucleosynthesis, we obtain the clustering amplitude σ8 = 0.819 ± 0.015 at 1.8% precision, S 8 ≡σ 8 (Ω m>/sub>/0.3) 0.5 = 0.840 ± 0.028, and the Hubble constant H 0 = (68.3 ± 1.1) km s −1 Mpc −1 at 1.6% precision. A joint constraint with Planck CMB lensing yields σ 8 = 0.812 ± 0.013, S 8 ≡σ 8 (Ω m>/sub>/0.3) 0.5 = 0.831 ± 0.023, and H0 = (68.1 ± 1.0) km s −1 Mpc −1 . These measurements agree with ΛCDM extrapolations from the CMB anisotropies measured by Planck. We revisit constraints from the KiDS, DES, and HSC galaxy surveys with a uniform set of assumptions and find that S 8 from all three are lower than that from ACT+Planck lensing by levels ranging from 1.7σ to 2.1σ. This motivates further measurements and comparison, not just between the CMB anisotropies and galaxy lensing but also between CMB lensing probing z ∼ 0.5–5 on mostly linear scales and galaxy lensing at z ∼ 0.5 on smaller scales. We combine with CMB anisotropies to constrain extensions of ΛCDM, limiting neutrino masses to ∑m ν < 0.13 eV (95% c.l.), for example. We describe the mass map and related data products that will enable a wide array of cross-correlation science. Our results provide independent confirmation that the universe is spatially flat, conforms with general relativity, and is described remarkably well by the ΛCDM model, while paving a promising path for neutrino physics with lensing from upcoming ground-based CMB surveys.

Cosmology↗

NASA Laboratory Astrophysics Workshop 2006 Introductory Remarks

NASA Laboratory Astrophysics Workshop 2006, is the fourth in a series of workshops held at four year intervals, to assess the laboratory needs of NASA's astrophysics missions - past, current and future. Investigators who need laboratory data to interpret their observations from space missions, theorists and modelers, experimentalists who produce the data, and scientists who compile databases have an opportunity to exchange ideas and understand each other's needs and limitations. The multi-wavelength character of these workshops allows cross-fertilization of ideas, raises awareness in the scientific community of the rapid advances in other fields, and the challenges it faces in prioritizing its laboratory needs in a tight budget environment. Currently, we are in the golden age of Space Astronomy, with three of NASA s Great Observatories, Hubble Space Telescope (HST), Chandra X-Ray Observatory (CXO), and Spitzer Space Telescope (SST), in operation and providing astronomers and opportunity to perform synergistic observations. In addition, the Far Ultraviolet Spectroscopic Explorer (FUSE), XMM-Newton, HETE-2, Galaxy Evolution Explorer (GALEX), INTEGRAL and Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP), are operating in an extended phase, while Swift and Suzaku are in their prime phase of operations. The wealth of data from these missions is stretching the Laboratory Astrophysics program to its limits. Missions in the future, which also need such data include the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST), Space Interferometry Mission (SIM), Constellation-X (Con-X), Herschel, and Planck. The interpretation of spectroscopic data from these missions requires knowledge of atomic and molecular parameters such as transition probabilities, f-values, oscillator strengths, excitation cross sections, collision strengths, which have either to be measured in the laboratory by simulating space plasma and interactions therein, or by theoretical calculations and modeling. Once the laboratory data are obtained, a key step to making them available to the observer is the creation and maintenance of critically compiled databases. Other areas of study, that are important for understanding planet formation, and for detection of molecules that are indicators of life, are also supported by the Laboratory Astrophysics program. Some examples are: studies of ices and dust grains in a space environment; nature and evolution of interstellar carbon-rich dust; and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. In addition, the program provides an opportunity for the investigation of novel ideas, such as simulating radiative shock instabilities in plasmas, in order to understand jets observed in space. A snapshot of the currently funded program, mission needs, and relevance of laboratory data to interpreting observations, will be obtained at this workshop through invited and contributed talks and poster papers. These will form the basis for discussions in splinter groups. The Science Organization Committee will integrate the results of the discussions into a coherent White Paper, which will provide guidance to NASA in structuring the Laboratory Astrophysics program in subsequent years, and also to the scientific community in submitting research proposals to NASA for funding.

Hasan, Hashima↗

Science Archives in the 21st Century: A NASA LAMBDA Report

Lambda is a thematic data center that focuses on serving the cosmic microwave background (CMB) research community. LAMBDA is an active archive for NASA's Cosmic Background Explorer (COBE) and Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) mission data sets. In addition, LAMBDA provides analysis software, on-line tools, relevant ancillary data and important web links. LAMBDA also tries to preserve the most important ground-based and suborbital CMB data sets. CMB data is unlike other astrophysical data, consisting of intrinsically diffuse surface brightness photometry with a signal contrast of the order 1 part in 100,000 relative to the uniform background. Because of the extremely faint signal levels, the signal-to-noise ratio is relatively low and detailed instrument-specific knowledge of the data is essential. While the number of data sets being produced is not especially large, those data sets are becoming large and complex. That tendency will increase when the many polarization experiments currently being deployed begin producing data. The LAMBDA experience supports many aspects of the NASA data archive model developed informally over the last ten years-that small focused data centers are often more effective than larger more ambitious collections, for example; that data centers are usually best run by active scientists; that it can be particularly advantageous if those scientists are leaders in the use of the archived data sets; etc. LAMBDA has done some things so well that they might provide lessons for other archives. A lot of effort has been devoted to developing a simple and consistent interface to data sets, for example; and serving all the documentation required via simple 'more' pages and longer explanatory supplements. Many of the problems faced by LAMBDA will also not surprise anyone trying to manage other space science data. These range from persuading mission scientists to provide their data as quickly as possible, to dealing with a high volume of nuisance (spam) messages. Because so many data center problems and solutions are common across individual data centers and disciplines it would be very valuable to establish some new systems of communication - such as informal email lists for administrators and developers. But resources are very limited, so new timeconsuming and inefficient mechanisms - like too-frequent and too-structured meetingsshould be avoided. Although there are great advantages to being small, agile and independent, there are also some areas where science data centers within and without NASA could be better coordinated - for the assignment of persistent identifiers; to encourage the early adoption of useful standards and technologies; etc. Some super-structure to facilitate such coordination might be beneficial as long as it doesn't begin to control the other work of the archives, and become a "methodology police". In this respect the CCSDS "Reference Model for an Open Archive Information System" is a little worrying. It may be that the closer a data center gets to following such a detailed prescription, the less effective it will become. It is much better to have an informal coordination process than a bureaucratic straight-jacket.

Butterworth, P.↗