Skip to main content

Jason Steffen - Five way interview

Jason Steffen is associate professor of physics at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas. A longtime science team member of NASA’s Kepler mission, he has contributed to the discovery and characterisation of thousands of planets that orbit distant stars. His new book is Hidden in the Heavens.

Why astronomy?

I originally wanted to be an aerospace engineer to design and build airplanes.  My undergraduate institution didn't have aerospace engineering:  I took an astronomy class my first quarter, and decided to major in physics.  My degrees are in physics rather than astronomy, but my research is all on topics related to astronomy in one way or another. 

For a period of time after graduate school I did experimental physics research on dark matter and dark energy.  I was working at a national laboratory, a big atom smasher outside of Chicago, called Fermilab.  At the same time that I was doing this work for Fermilab, I also worked for NASA on the Kepler mission to find exoplanets.  Half my salary came from one project, the other half from the other.  It was pretty intense, but I learned a lot.  Eventually, I decided that I needed to stick with one research area and chose to stick with exoplanets. 

Why this book?

For a long time I've been interested in writing a book.  I enjoy explaining the things that we've collectively learned and how we learned them.  It had been just over a decade since the original Kepler mission launched, so it was far enough in the past that we could give a decent assessment of what its significance was, but not so far in the past that everyone was retired or dead.  So, I still had access to my colleagues, as well as a copy of all of the emails that were shared among our working group.  It seemed that the time was right to tell the story of the mission.

We’ve now discovered thousands of exoplanets - are we still finding anything new and unexpected?

A lot of exoplanet science has moved on from discovering new systems (although that still happens).  Today, our advances often happen in characterizing the properties of those planets.  Measuring their masses, the composition of their atmospheres, the nature of the planetary system that they live within, the properties of the star that they orbit, etc.  We are learning a lot about how the sizes of different planets in a given system, and their orbits, relate to each other and what that implies for their histories, and the history of the solar system.

We also have instruments, like the James Webb Space Telescope, where we can see the different chemicals that are in the atmospheres of these planets.  That tells us about the conditions where they formed, and whether or not their surfaces might be conducive for life to exist.  Each day there are a dozen or so new papers that share new results, so there is still consistent progress in a number of areas.

What’s next?

 In exoplanets, there is ongoing work with the TESS mission (Transiting Exoplanet Survey Satellite).  That is discovering new systems on a regular basis.  There are also plans to launch the PLATO mission, which is a successor to Kepler, this time led by the European Space Agency.  Another satellite, the Nancy Grace Roman Telescope, led by NASA will be able to detect a lot of planets across our galaxy that we currently don't have the capability to see.  So, the field of exoplanets is not slowing down any time soon.

What’s exciting you at the moment?

My current research is looking at the chemical composition of the planets themselves, not their atmospheres, but their interiors.  Planets form in a disk of material that orbits the newborn star.  As that disk cools, different minerals condense and rain down to the disk midplane where they ultimately form the building blocks of planets.  My group models the condensation of those different minerals so that we can predict what the planets will be made of.

My group also developed computer software that models the internal structure of planets given their composition.  So, we can take the output of our predictions for the composition of the planets, and then turn it into real planets using this other software.  (We called the software MAGRATHEA, after the planet in the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy where planets are made to order.)  Ultimately, we are trying to predict the details of what exoplanets are like, and the conditions under which they formed.

Photograph (c) Robert Royer III

These articles will always be free - but if you'd like to support my online work, consider buying a virtual coffee:
Interview by Brian Clegg - See all Brian's online articles or subscribe to a weekly email free here
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

It's On You - Nick Chater and George Loewenstein *****

Going on the cover you might think this was a political polemic - and admittedly there's an element of that - but the reason it's so good is quite different. It shows how behavioural economics and social psychology have led us astray by putting the focus way too much on individuals. A particular target is the concept of nudges which (as described in Brainjacking ) have been hugely over-rated. But overall the key problem ties to another psychological concept: framing. Huge kudos to both Nick Chater and George Loewenstein - a behavioural scientist and an economics and psychology professor - for having the guts to take on the flaws in their own earlier work and that of colleagues, because they make clear just how limited and potentially dangerous is the belief that individuals changing their behaviour can solve large-scale problems. The main thesis of the book is that there are two ways to approach the major problems we face - an 'i-frame' where we focus on the individual ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Introducing Artificial Intelligence – Henry Brighton & Howard Selina ****

It is almost impossible to rate these relentlessly hip books – they are pure marmite*. The huge  Introducing  … series (a vast range of books covering everything from Quantum Theory to Islam), previously known as …  for Beginners , puts across the message in a style that owes as much to Terry Gilliam and pop art as it does to popular science. Pretty well every page features large graphics with speech bubbles that are supposed to emphasise the point. Funnily,  Introducing Artificial Intelligence  is both a good and bad example of the series. Let’s get the bad bits out of the way first. The illustrators of these books are very variable, and I didn’t particularly like the pictures here. They did add something – the illustrations in these books always have a lot of information content, rather than being window dressing – but they seemed more detached from the text and rather lacking in the oomph the best versions have. The other real problem is that...
Post a Comment
Read more

The Laws of Thought - Tom Griffiths *****

In giving us a history of attempts to explain our thinking abilities, Tom Griffiths demonstrates an excellent ability to pitch information just right for the informed general reader.  We begin with Aristotelian logic and the way Boole and others transformed it into a kind of arithmetic before a first introduction of computing and theories of language. Griffiths covers a surprising amount of ground - we don't just get, for instance, the obvious figures of Turing, von Neumann and Shannon, but the interaction between the computing pioneers and those concerned with trying to understand the way we think - for example in the work of Jerome Bruner, of whom I confess I'd never heard.  This would prove to be the case with a whole host of people who have made interesting contributions to the understanding of human thought processes. Sometimes their theories were contradictory - this isn't an easy field to successfully observe - but always they were interesting. But for me, at least, ...
Post a Comment
Read more