|Contact:||646-6522, nicole [at] nmsu.edu|
|Office hours:||Tuesdays and Thursdays 11:35 - 12:50, Astronomy #203|
|Texts:||Black Holes, White Dwarfs and Neutron Stars: The Physics of Compact Objects, |
by Shapiro & Teukolsky
|Gravitation, by Thorne, Misner, & Wheeler|
The seminar will focus on a few current astronomical issues related to black holes, rather than on the theoretical physics which motivate their construction. A working knowledge of basic black hole physics will be assumed, but we will not assume that you are greatly conversant with general relativity. Two texts are recommended above, for background reading in black hole physics.
Performance will be judged on the basis of individual seminar presentations, verbal and written work related to the presentations of other students, and (perhaps) a few short homework assignments.
You are responsible for reading the Presentation article(s) each week, and for participating actively in discussion of each paper each week. I emphasize the importance of doing so; it will be critical to maintaining the professional level of our seminar. Hard copies will be provided on request.
Seminar presentations should be created for display with a laptop and projector (speak with Jon Holtzman to guarantee that you have the hardware you need on your presentation day). You may work in PPT, HTML, PDF, or any other common file format. Practice your talk several times before you give it, so that you appear polished and can focus on communicating the science rather than reading the slides.
I recommend reading at least one paper mentioned in the Introduction of your article (to establish context and motivation), and at least one paper mentioned in the Conclusions (to understand the implications of the work). Having done so, be sure to integrate this information into your presentation.
Your presentation should discuss the major conclusions of the papers, and place it in the context of its field. Theoretical papers should be examined for connections to actual data, in the form of testable predictions. What are the extended ramifications, if a particular theory is correct? What are the alternatives, if it is incorrect? For observational papers, it may be appropriate to walk through the observational and analysis techniques in detail. If you disagree with a paper, do not hesitate to criticize it!
As a general rule, show figures in your presentation but avoid including large tables of data (the audience cannot read them quickly, and will be far more interested in your conclusions that in the raw numbers). You may assume that your audience has read the paper once for themselves.
Attendance at seminar is mandatory. Up to one absence may be excused, for (a) a planned trip to a major telescope or to work with collaborators in which you will play a significant role, or (b) an unplanned bout of diphtheria. Discuss case (a) scenarios with me well ahead of time.
|Feb. 10||James||A Relationship between Nuclear Black Hole Mass and Galaxy Velocity Dispersion|
|Gebhardt et al. 2000, ApJ, 539, L13-L16|
|Feb. 17||Cat||Evidence for a Supermassive Black Hole in the S0 Galaxy NGC 3245|
|Barth et al. 2001, ApJ, 555, 685-708|
|Feb. 24||Jessica||Evidence for a Black Hole from High Rotation Velocities in a sub-parsec Region of NGC4258|
|Miyoshi et al. 1995, Nature, 373, 127-129|
|The Link between Warm Molecular Disks in Maser Nuclei and Star Formation near the Black Hole at the Galactic Center|
|Milosavljevic & Loeb 2004, ApJ, 604, L45-48|
|Mar. 3||Jillian||Stellar Orbits around the Galactic Center Black Hole|
|Ghez et al. 2005, ApJ, 620, 744-757|
|Mar. 10||Roberto||Spiral Structure in the Circumnuclear Disk at the Center of NGC 4258|
|Maoz 1995, ApJ, 455, L131-L134|
|Dynamical Constraints on Alternatives to Supermassive Black Holes in Galactic Nuclei|
|Maoz 1998, ApJ, 494, L181-L184|
|Mar. 17||Joe||Quasars and Galaxy Formation|
|Silk & Rees 1998, A&A, 331, L1-L4|
|Ultraluminous Starbursts from Supermassive Black Hole-induced Outflows|
|Silk 2005, MNRAS, 364, 1337-1342|
|Mar. 31||Mike||The Slope of the Black Hole Mass versus Velocity Dispersion Correlation|
|Tremaine et al. 2002, ApJ, 574, 740-753|
|Apr. 7||Ashley||Untangling the Merger History of Massive Black Holes with LISA|
|Hughes 2002, MNRAS, 331, 805-816|
|Apr. 10||Linghong||Observational Evidence for the Co-evolution of Galaxy Mergers, Quasars, and the Blue/Red Galaxy Transition|
|(note: Monday)||Hopkins, Bundy, Hernquist & Ellis 2006, ApJ, submitted|
|Black Holes in Galaxy Mergers: Evolution of Quasars|
|Hopkins et al. 2005, ApJ, 630, 705-715|
|Apr. 21||Paul||Present-Day Growth of Black Holes and Bulges: The Sloan Digital Sky Survey Perspective|
|Heckman et al. 2004, ApJ, 613, 109-118|
|Apr. 28||Doug||Active Galactic Nuclei with Candidate Intermediate-Mass Black Holes|
|Greene & Ho, 2004, ApJ, 610, 722-736|