Advertisement · 728 × 90

Posts by Benedikt Diemer

Email from Chris Reynolds to the AXIS Team. Subject is disappointing AXIS news. Text of e-mail reads: Dear AXIS Friends,


The AXIS team has received some very disappointing news – we have been informed by NASA HQ that AXIS is not eligible for selection and hence the Concept Study Report (CSR) will not be subjected to the full review process.   


AXIS represents the scientific aspirations of a large international community. As a member of one of the AXIS science working groups, you deserve a candid explanation from the PI of what happened and why.  That is the purpose of this note.


NASA’s decision was programmatic and not based on a review of the technology or science; the mission profile described in the submitted CSR was over the allowed budget and schedule.  How was such a thing possible?   In short, with NASA-GSFC as the AXIS managing center, the mission formulation process was critically compromised by the seismic shifts occurring in NASA and the Federal government.  The AXIS study team was hit hard by three unprecedented challenges: 


NASA’s Deferred Resignation Program (DRP) and the pressure at GSFC to resign/retire created a rapid and uncontrolled loss of over 20 personnel with key expertise during a critical mission formulation period, including the main GSFC Project Manager (Jimmy Marsh) and the X-ray mirror lead (Will Zhang) and many discipline engineers.

Email from Chris Reynolds to the AXIS Team. Subject is disappointing AXIS news. Text of e-mail reads: Dear AXIS Friends, The AXIS team has received some very disappointing news – we have been informed by NASA HQ that AXIS is not eligible for selection and hence the Concept Study Report (CSR) will not be subjected to the full review process. AXIS represents the scientific aspirations of a large international community. As a member of one of the AXIS science working groups, you deserve a candid explanation from the PI of what happened and why. That is the purpose of this note. NASA’s decision was programmatic and not based on a review of the technology or science; the mission profile described in the submitted CSR was over the allowed budget and schedule. How was such a thing possible? In short, with NASA-GSFC as the AXIS managing center, the mission formulation process was critically compromised by the seismic shifts occurring in NASA and the Federal government. The AXIS study team was hit hard by three unprecedented challenges: NASA’s Deferred Resignation Program (DRP) and the pressure at GSFC to resign/retire created a rapid and uncontrolled loss of over 20 personnel with key expertise during a critical mission formulation period, including the main GSFC Project Manager (Jimmy Marsh) and the X-ray mirror lead (Will Zhang) and many discipline engineers.

GSFC priorities rapidly realigned to the FY2026 President’s Budget Request (PBR) that eliminated the Probe program, further reducing the availability of GSFC engineering and mission formulation personnel (incl. cost analysts and schedulers) over the critical Summer and Fall months. Key work was halted for almost seven weeks when the core GSFC AXIS study team, dominated by NASA civil servants, was furloughed during the government shutdown.  NASA HQ’s extension to the CSR submission deadline (from 18-Dec-2025 to 29-Jan-2026) was inadequate compensation for the disruption and lost time.


Taken together, these factors disrupted the basic grass-roots costing process (which requires extensive “reach back” to the discipline engineers to assess labor requirements) as well as the cost-design iteration process that is central to the formulation of a cost-capped and schedule-constrained mission.  While the mission design was finalized in April, our initial grass-roots costing (which was ~10% over budget) could only be completed in September due to the lack of assigned resources.  With the subsequent government shutdown and then “pens down” in early-December forced by the GSFC Executive Review process, there was no opportunity to work through the set of cost/schedule savings that had already been identified by the AXIS team. 


Ultimately, the GSFC executive council gave AXIS leadership the choice of submitting a CSR with a non-compliant schedule and cost, or not submitting a CSR at all.  We of course proceeded with the submission, including a narrative that we understood the path to a cost-compliant profile (that we would have discussed with the review panels during the Site Visit). NASA HQ has ruled this stance to be unacceptable.


It is important to stress that NASA’s programmatic decision was before any technical review had been conducted.  The decision was NOT due to any concerns about AXIS technology. Indeed, the AXIS Phase A work had major successes with furthering

GSFC priorities rapidly realigned to the FY2026 President’s Budget Request (PBR) that eliminated the Probe program, further reducing the availability of GSFC engineering and mission formulation personnel (incl. cost analysts and schedulers) over the critical Summer and Fall months. Key work was halted for almost seven weeks when the core GSFC AXIS study team, dominated by NASA civil servants, was furloughed during the government shutdown. NASA HQ’s extension to the CSR submission deadline (from 18-Dec-2025 to 29-Jan-2026) was inadequate compensation for the disruption and lost time. Taken together, these factors disrupted the basic grass-roots costing process (which requires extensive “reach back” to the discipline engineers to assess labor requirements) as well as the cost-design iteration process that is central to the formulation of a cost-capped and schedule-constrained mission. While the mission design was finalized in April, our initial grass-roots costing (which was ~10% over budget) could only be completed in September due to the lack of assigned resources. With the subsequent government shutdown and then “pens down” in early-December forced by the GSFC Executive Review process, there was no opportunity to work through the set of cost/schedule savings that had already been identified by the AXIS team. Ultimately, the GSFC executive council gave AXIS leadership the choice of submitting a CSR with a non-compliant schedule and cost, or not submitting a CSR at all. We of course proceeded with the submission, including a narrative that we understood the path to a cost-compliant profile (that we would have discussed with the review panels during the Site Visit). NASA HQ has ruled this stance to be unacceptable. It is important to stress that NASA’s programmatic decision was before any technical review had been conducted. The decision was NOT due to any concerns about AXIS technology. Indeed, the AXIS Phase A work had major successes with furthering

Indeed, the AXIS Phase A work had major successes with furthering the key technologies. GSFC’s Next Generation X-ray Optics (NGXO) team successfully demonstrated iridium-coated, stress-compensated mirror segments that meet AXIS baseline requirements (i.e. segment-level performance at sub-arcsecond level).  NGXO also built the first AXIS demonstrator mirror module, learning critical lessons about mirror alignment, mounting and bonding. On the detector side, MIT quickly moved to fabricate AXIS-like CCDs and, working with our colleagues at Stanford, recently demonstrated that they achieve the required readout rate and spectral resolution. 


Similarly, NASA’s decision was NOT a judgment of the importance of AXIS science.  The AXIS science case was rated excellent in the Step 1 review, and it only became stronger during our Phase A study.  The AXIS Community Science Book, which many of you contributed to, is an extremely powerful demonstration of the relevance and importance of high-resolution X-ray observations to all areas of astrophysics. The Science Book is one of the most important legacies of the AXIS Phase A study and, I believe, will help define future mission concepts for many years to come.  I thank you all from the bottom of my heart for all of your work on this.


AXIS has been a long journey; we started under the leadership of Richard Mushotzky more than nine years ago.  During that time, it’s been an enormous privilege to work with amazing people; the AXIS science team, the incredible/brilliant GSFC and Northrop Grumman engineers, and the wider astrophysics community.  I am, quite frankly, livid that AXIS ultimately fell victim to the programmatic chaos of 2025. The astronomical community deserves better. I hope that NASA leadership, especially at GSFC and HQ, can have an honest discussion about how to better support and protect programs during extraordinary times.

Indeed, the AXIS Phase A work had major successes with furthering the key technologies. GSFC’s Next Generation X-ray Optics (NGXO) team successfully demonstrated iridium-coated, stress-compensated mirror segments that meet AXIS baseline requirements (i.e. segment-level performance at sub-arcsecond level).  NGXO also built the first AXIS demonstrator mirror module, learning critical lessons about mirror alignment, mounting and bonding. On the detector side, MIT quickly moved to fabricate AXIS-like CCDs and, working with our colleagues at Stanford, recently demonstrated that they achieve the required readout rate and spectral resolution. Similarly, NASA’s decision was NOT a judgment of the importance of AXIS science. The AXIS science case was rated excellent in the Step 1 review, and it only became stronger during our Phase A study. The AXIS Community Science Book, which many of you contributed to, is an extremely powerful demonstration of the relevance and importance of high-resolution X-ray observations to all areas of astrophysics. The Science Book is one of the most important legacies of the AXIS Phase A study and, I believe, will help define future mission concepts for many years to come. I thank you all from the bottom of my heart for all of your work on this. AXIS has been a long journey; we started under the leadership of Richard Mushotzky more than nine years ago. During that time, it’s been an enormous privilege to work with amazing people; the AXIS science team, the incredible/brilliant GSFC and Northrop Grumman engineers, and the wider astrophysics community. I am, quite frankly, livid that AXIS ultimately fell victim to the programmatic chaos of 2025. The astronomical community deserves better. I hope that NASA leadership, especially at GSFC and HQ, can have an honest discussion about how to better support and protect programs during extraordinary times.

For now, as a community, we must look forward. There is still one excellent mission under consideration for the Probe program, PRIMA, and we wish them a smooth and speedy path to selection and flight.  In X-ray astronomy, the SMEX and MidEX programs represent concrete pathways for focused, high-impact missions, and the scientific case we built for AXIS provides a strong foundation for those concepts. The technologies we advanced in Step 1 and Phase A, particularly the NGXO mirror work and the MIT/Stanford detector demonstrations, can anchor the next generation of proposals. Most importantly, the AXIS Community Science Book, representing more than 500 scientists across, is a living document and a powerful signal to NASA leadership that this community is organized, serious, and not going anywhere. I encourage everyone to use it actively, as a resource for future concept development, for Astro2030 engagement, and for building the next mission that will deliver high angular resolution X-ray imaging to address the fundamental questions about black hole growth, galaxy evolution, and the hot universe that motivated AXIS from the beginning. This community built something remarkable over nine years and that doesn't end here.


Thank you again for your support of AXIS over these times.


Best

Chris and the AXIS leadership team

For now, as a community, we must look forward. There is still one excellent mission under consideration for the Probe program, PRIMA, and we wish them a smooth and speedy path to selection and flight. In X-ray astronomy, the SMEX and MidEX programs represent concrete pathways for focused, high-impact missions, and the scientific case we built for AXIS provides a strong foundation for those concepts. The technologies we advanced in Step 1 and Phase A, particularly the NGXO mirror work and the MIT/Stanford detector demonstrations, can anchor the next generation of proposals. Most importantly, the AXIS Community Science Book, representing more than 500 scientists across, is a living document and a powerful signal to NASA leadership that this community is organized, serious, and not going anywhere. I encourage everyone to use it actively, as a resource for future concept development, for Astro2030 engagement, and for building the next mission that will deliver high angular resolution X-ray imaging to address the fundamental questions about black hole growth, galaxy evolution, and the hot universe that motivated AXIS from the beginning. This community built something remarkable over nine years and that doesn't end here. Thank you again for your support of AXIS over these times. Best Chris and the AXIS leadership team

The @axisprobe.bsky.social team learned that the phase A concept study report of AXIS (the Advanced X-ray Imaging Satellite) will not be reviewed because the lost personnel at NASA Goddard and government shutdown impacted our schedule and budget. 🔭 Here is the PI's e-mail with the explanation.

1 month ago 239 98 23 28
Post image

Had some fun playing with visualizations that show the evolution of the cosmic web in an image instead of a movie (high-res versions are here: www.benediktdiemer.com/visualizatio...)

4 months ago 5 1 1 0
Preview
Astronomy on Tap Tickets | Free | 18 Feb @ DC9, Washington D.C. | DICE ͏feat: beer, trivia & space talks BAR OPENS at 5:00PM Astronomy on Tap DC features 3 speakers giving engaging talks about the Universe and prize giveaways....

Do you lie awake at night worrying about cosmic collapse? On Feb 18th, @benedikt.bsky.social will tell us why cosmic collapse keeps your lights on! Curious? Come to @dc9club.bsky.social to learn more!
RSVP for your free ticket here: dice.fm/event/py7okw...
Science made possible by your govt agencies

1 year ago 1 3 0 0

This should be a fun one! Really looking forward to finally doing AoT DC 🍺🔭

1 year ago 3 2 0 0

Turns out, the dust modeling / RT is the hard part, but Andrea crushed it.

The short answer: conventional dust models definitely fail at reproducing massive red galaxies (DSFGs etc.). They can be reproduced, but only with some pretty extreme (unrealistic?) dust screens.

Lots more in the paper...

1 year ago 0 0 0 0
Preview
The mass-dependent UVJ diagram at cosmic noon: A challenge for galaxy evolution models and dust radiative transfer Context. The UVJ color-color diagram is a widely used diagnostic to separate star-forming and quiescent galaxies. Observational data from photometric surveys reveal a strong stellar mass trend, with h...

I'm super excited about this paper on the arXiv today led by UGent grad student Andrea Gebek!

Why are there basically no red galaxies in IllustrisTNG at cosmic noon? It's tempting to think that there might be something wrong about SFRs, but what about dust...

arxiv.org/abs/2501.12008

1 year ago 3 0 1 0

And indeed, there is some information in the maps, meaning we can improve on just assuming the average accretion rate at fixed mass. However, the accuracy isn't nearly what we'd like it to be... which means there just isn't enough information even in combined X-ray + SZ! The search continues...

1 year ago 2 0 0 0

On the arXiv: great work led by graduating student John Soltis and Michelle Ntampaka.

The issue: the accretion rate is key for the properties of cluster halos, but we have no reliable observational proxies. So we decided to use ML to look for "optimal" info in realistic X-ray/SZ maps from MTNG.

1 year ago 4 0 1 0
Advertisement
Post image Post image

Wrapping up 10 days in China by catching up with my undergrad adviser (after 16 years), friends, and collaborators... thanks for the fantastic visits, Tsinghua and Jiao Tong! A truly memorable trip. Apologies to all the ducks that got harmed in the process.

1 year ago 4 0 0 1

Just logged out of twitter for good and my mental health immediately improved by 6.3%

1 year ago 4 0 0 0

The timing was amazing... half your figures just went onto my class slides for tomorrow :)

1 year ago 1 0 1 0

Happy to add you to the repo... email me

2 years ago 0 0 0 0

It's not public at the moment, but happy to share! Are you interested in doing something similar?

2 years ago 0 0 1 0

Nothing's perfect, so please let us know how we can improve Colossus-Web! There's a link to a feedback form at the bottom of the page.

We aren't planning on a release paper at this time, so please RT if you enjoy the calculator and think it's relevant to your followers!

2 years ago 0 0 1 0
Post image

3) Advanced cosmological parameters: different dark energy models, relativistic species, etc.

4) Advanced calculations: correlation functions, peak height, etc. Power spectra can be calculated via fitting functions or using CAMB.

2 years ago 1 0 1 0
Post image

So what can Colossus-Web do? A few highlights:

1) Graphical interface: you can plot tons of cosmological functions and download the data to csv files.

2) Multiple cosmologies: you can compare as many pre-programmed cosmologies as you want, or create your own.

2 years ago 0 0 1 0
Advertisement

First of all, most of the credit goes to Erik Chou, a fantastically talented UMD undergraduate. He crushed this project, and you should (try to) hire him in '25!

echou.notion.site/Erik-Chou-bb...

2 years ago 0 0 1 0
Post image

Need the age of the Universe at z = 5 but only got a phone? Wanna compute a correlation function without python? Fear not, for we are proudly presenting Colossus-Web, a powerful online cosmology calculator!

colossus.astro.umd.edu

More info in replies...

2 years ago 9 2 1 0

UMD astronomy is hiring! It's an open call, though we're particularly interested in observers this time. Feel free to message if you're interested and have questions, since I went through the process not that long ago.

jobregister.aas.org/ad/2ac49c51

2 years ago 7 2 0 0