The M87 Black Hole Mass From Gas-Dynamical Models Of Space Telescope Imaging Spectrograph Observations

The supermassive black hole of M87 is one of the most massive black holes known and has been the subject of several stellar and gas-dynamical mass measurements; however, the most recent revision to the stellar-dynamical black hole mass measurement is a factor of about two larger than the previous gas-dynamical determinations. Here, we apply comprehensive gas-dynamical models that include the propagation of emission-line profiles through the telescope and spectrograph optics to new Space Telescope Imaging Spectrograph observations from the Hubble Space Telescope. Unlike the previous gas-dynamical studies of M87, we map out the complete kinematic structure of the emission-line disk within similar to 40 pc from the nucleus, and find that a small amount of velocity dispersion internal to the gas disk is required to match the observed line widths. We examine a scenario in which the intrinsic velocity dispersion provides dynamical support to the disk, and determine that the inferred black hole mass increases by only 6%. Incorporating this effect into the error budget, we ultimately measure a mass of M-BH = (3.5(-0.7)(+0.9)) x 10(9)M circle dot (68% confidence). Our gas-dynamical black hole mass continues to differ from the most recent stellar-dynamical mass by a factor of two, underscoring the need for carrying out more cross-checks between the two main black hole mass measurement methods.NSF Astronomy and Astrophysics Postdoctoral Fellowship 1102845Space Telescope Science Institute 12162NASA NAS 5-26555NSF AST-1108835Astronom

Ideology in Physics: Ontological Naturalism and Theism Confront Big Bang, Cosmic Fine Tuning, and the Multiverse of M-Theory

The most profound questions that philosophers and scientists have asked across the centuries have been metaphysical and existential, such as “What is the meaning and purpose of life, why are we here, and why is there something rather than nothing?” There can be no definitive answers to these questions, so those who pose and propose answers to them necessarily engage ideology. Some physicists have become philosophers in that they are attempting to answer these profound questions with highly speculative theories as, for instance, Hawking and Mlodonow’s book The Grand Design (2010) which they tout as providing new answers to age-old questions by positing a multiverse that created itself. Other physicists impugn these efforts as putting physics in a no-man’s land and wanting to relax the empirical and falsifiable criteria for judging the usefulness of a theory. These theories are offered in response to the remarkable precision of the initial conditions of the big bang, and the exquisite fine-tuning of nature’s laws for intelligent life. Theistic or deistic physicists see these things as the mark of a designer; atheist or agnostic physicists call this a cop out and offer the multiverse as an alternative. The ideological battles are thus between ontological naturalists (there is no reality beyond the physical) who lean toward atheism, and methodological naturalists (there is a mental and spiritual reality as well as a material one) who lean toward theism or deism

A Stellar Dynamical Mass Measurement of the Black Hole in NGC 3998 from Keck Adaptive Optics Observations

We present a new stellar dynamical mass measurement of the black hole in the nearby, S0 galaxy NGC 3998. By combining laser guide star adaptive optics observations obtained with the OH-Suppressing Infrared Imaging Spectrograph on the Keck II telescope with long-slit spectroscopy from the Hubble Space Telescope and the Keck I telescope, we map out the stellar kinematics on both small spatial scales, well within the black hole sphere of influence, and on large scales. We find that the galaxy is rapidly rotating and exhibits a sharp central peak in the velocity dispersion. Using the kinematics and the stellar luminosity density derived from imaging observations, we construct three-integral, orbit-based, triaxial stellar dynamical models. We find the black hole has a mass of M_BH = (8.1_{-1.9}^{+2.0}) x 10^8 M_sun, with an I-band stellar mass-to-light ratio of M/L = 5.0_{-0.4}^{+0.3} M_sun/L_sun (3-sigma uncertainties), and that the intrinsic shape of the galaxy is very round, but oblate. With the work presented here, NGC 3998 is now one of a very small number of galaxies for which both stellar and gas dynamical modeling have been used to measure the mass of the black hole. The stellar dynamical mass is nearly a factor of four larger than the previous gas dynamical black hole mass measurement. Given that this cross-check has so far only been attempted on a few galaxies with mixed results, carrying out similar studies in other objects is essential for quantifying the magnitude and distribution of the cosmic scatter in the black hole mass - host galaxy relations.Comment: 19 pages, 15 figures, accepted for publication in Ap

Kennedy’s Last Term: A Report on the 2017–2018 Supreme Court

Twenty-eighteen brought the end of Justice Anthony Kennedy’s tenure on the Supreme Court. We are now entering a period of uncertainty about American constitutional law. Will we remain on the trajectory of the last half-century? Or will the Court move in a different direction? The character of the Supreme Court in closely divided cases is often a function of the median justice. The new median justice will be Chief Justice John Roberts if Kennedy’s replacement is a conservative likely to vote most often with Justices Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, and Samuel Alito. This will mark a new phase of the Roberts Court. Yet the composition of the Court is not the only important variable. The Court has been influenced—heavily influenced, in some areas—by elite cultural opinion as well. Where such influence has degraded the foundations of constitutional law, a new justice, no matter what his views, can only make a limited difference. Before offering some conjectures about the post-Kennedy Court, though, we look back at some of the signature cases of this past term

A Less Corrupt Term: 2016–2017 Supreme Court Roundup

(Excerpt) In these unusually turbulent times for the presidency and Congress, the Supreme Court’s latest term stands out for its lack of drama. There were no 5–4 end-of-the-term cases that mesmerized the nation. There were no blockbuster decisions. Even so, the Court was hardly immune to the steady transformation of our governing institutions into reality TV shows. Over the weekend leading into the final day of the term, speculation ignited from who-knows-where about the possible departure of its main character, Justice Anthony Kennedy. To us, the chatter seemed forced—as if the viewing public needed something to fill the vacuum left by a season of episodes with fewer sex scenes and less louche intrigue than usual. But the scriptwriters did not disappoint entirely. In the season finale, the justices delivered split opinions in two cases that had not even been fully briefed and argued on the merits—one about President Trump’s limits on immigration from six majority-Muslim nations, the other about the right of a female same-sex spouse to be listed as a parent on a birth certificate alongside the birth mother. These opinions hint at some of the stories that will shape next year’s plotline—the first full term for the new character, Justice Neil Gorsuch

Judge Posner, Judge Wilkinson, and Judicial Critique of Constitutional Theory

Judge Richard Posner’s well-known view is that constitutional theory is useless. And Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson III has lambasted constitutional theory for the way in which its “cosmic” aspirations threaten democratic self-governance. Many other judges hold similar views. And yet both Posner and Wilkinson — in the popular press, in law review articles, and in books — have advocated what appear to be their own theories of how to judge in constitutional cases. Judicial pragmatism for Posner and judicial restraint for Wilkinson seem to be substitutes for originalism, living constitutionalism, political process theory, and so on. But both Posner and Wilkinson also deny that they are offering a theory at all. This is puzzling. How do these judges simultaneously reject constitutional theory yet seemingly replace it with theories of their own? This Article answers that question — a question that must be answered in order to understand the present-day relationship between constitutional theory and constitutional adjudication. The perspectives of Judge Posner and Judge Wilkinson are particularly valuable because they have not only decided hundreds of constitutional cases but have also written extensively about constitutional theory. Drawing on a close reading of revealing slices of both their extrajudicial writing and their judicial opinions in constitutional cases, this Article makes three contributions. First, it brings to light agreements between Posner and Wilkinson that run far deeper than the heralded differences between them and that stem from their situated understanding of their judicial role. Second, it exposes the limited influence of judicial pragmatism and judicial restraint on these judges’ own constitutional jurisprudence even in those cases where one might expect constitutional theory to exert maximal influence. Third, it explains how judicial pragmatism and judicial restraint are best understood not as constitutional theories but as descriptions of judicial dispositions — character traits that pertain to judicial excellence — that can and should be criticized on their own terms

Judge Posner, Judge Wilkinson, and Judicial Critique of Constitutional Theory,

Judge Richard Posner\u27s well-known view is that constitutional theory is useless. And Judge J Harvie Wilkinson III has lambasted constitutional theory for the way in which its cosmic aspirations threaten democratic self-governance. Many other judges hold similar views. And yet both Posner and Wilkinson-in the popular press, in law review articles, and in books-have advocated what appear to be their own theories of how to judge in constitutional cases. Judicial pragmatism for Posner and judicial restraint for Wilkinson seem to be substitutes for originalism, living constitutionalism, political process theory, and so on. But both Posner and Wilkinson also deny that they are offering a theory at all. This is puzzling. How do these judges simultaneously reject constitutional theory yet seemingly replace it with theories of their own? This Article answers that question-a question that must be answered in order to understand the present-day relationship between constitutional theory and constitutional adjudication. The perspectives of Judge Posner and Judge Wilkinson are particularly valuable because they have not only decided hundreds of constitutional cases but have also written extensively about constitutional theory. Drawing on a close reading of revealing slices of both their extrajudicial writing and their judicial opinions in constitutional cases, this Article makes three contributions. First, it brings to light agreements between Posner and Wilkinson that run far deeper than the heralded differences between them and that stem from their situated understanding of their judicial role. Second, it exposes the limited influence of judicial pragmatism and judicial restraint on these judges\u27 own constitutional jurisprudence even in those cases where one might expect constitutional theory to exert maximal influence. Third, it explains how judicial pragmatism and judicial restraint are best understood not as constitutional theories but as descriptions of judicial dispositions-character traits that pertain to judicial excellence-that can and should be criticized on their own terms

A Less Corrupt Term, Supreme Court Round-up for OT 2016

In these unusually turbulent times for the presidency and Congress, the Supreme Court’s latest term stands out for its lack of drama. There were no 5–4 end-of-the-term cases that mesmerized the nation. There were no blockbuster decisions. Even so, the Court was hardly immune to the steady transformation of our governing institutions into reality TV shows. Over the weekend leading into the final day of the term, speculation ignited from who-knows-where about the possible departure of its main character, Justice Anthony Kennedy. To us, the chatter seemed forced—as if the viewing public needed something to fill the vacuum left by a season of episodes with fewer sex scenes and less louche intrigue than usual. But the scriptwriters did not disappoint entirely. In the season finale, the justices delivered split opinions in two cases that had not even been fully briefed and argued on the merits—one about President Trump’s limits on immigration from six majority-Muslim nations, the other about the right of a female same-sex spouse to be listed as a parent on a birth certificate alongside the birth mother. These opinions hint at some of the stories that will shape next year’s plotline—the first full term for the new character, Justice Neil Gorsuch

Steps towards the development of a ‘culture of innovation’ amongst undergraduate industrial designers

Developing innovative solutions to problems is no easy task. Firstly there has to be a desire within the individual to seek out the innovative solution; secondly there is the problem of how to identify what constitutes an innovative solution; and finally one has to combat the natural tendency toward risk aversion. Successful industrial design is by its very nature innovative. Therefore generating a culture of innovation is a vital requirement in the development of a successful designer. Do we know how to stimulate, incubate and nurture innovation? What are the factors that give rise to an innovative mindset? This paper describes the experiences of an industrial design programme that for five years operated with a degree of success. However on review the programme was deemed to be lacking in innovation. Changes were made and after three years the impact was assessed and quantified and the results are now reported. Through the review strategies were developed which led to the creation of an environment for the promotion and nurturing of innovation appropriate to an undergraduate industrial design programme. Following the three year review further refinements to the model have been implemented, this will be the subject of further study