The center's 2003 Annual Board meeting:  A student's perspective

I have tried to summarize comments I gave at the center's Board meeting this year, along with anything else I have thought about since that time.  Also included are comments from other graduate students.

Degree programs

The space degree program is a great idea with a unique interdisciplinary approach.  It certainly addresses a current need within the science community and will be a benefit to science, both universities, and students as well.  My initial comments (last year) were that the program might be too much work.  However, since then I have had a better opportunity to review the graduate program and I no longer believe this is a problem.

My main concern is that as time goes by, the program may disintegrate into independent research fields or alternatively, it may become "watered down".  However, the tools to keep the CSAPS program focused are already in place:  There are course review procedures; the External Advisory Board provides important insight into current problems in planetary science and most importantly, I think, is to keep professors from different fields (and universities) talking to each other.

General comments

There is great cooperation between UArk and OSU on the REU program and on the degree programs.  On the other hand, research cooperation seems to have fallen off?  I don't feel that there is enough interaction among center students and faculty in general and I would very much like to see greater OSU participation in center events.  At the Lunar and Planetary Science Conference this year, it became apparent that the CSAPS seminars are the only "center events" that all of us participate in.  Do we need more discussions instead of seminars?  Many of the center seminars have been informative, but to be honest, a lecture is just a lecture.  The CSAPS seminars should definitely not be eliminated, but perhaps the format and/or scope could be reviewed and revised?

Potential solutions

As the center develops more, more research collaborations will naturally occur.  The REU program will stimulate cooperation as well and once the degree programs begin, the two universities will be forced to communicate more.  We might consider more internal seminars and/or more times for general research discussion.  A suggestion from other graduate students was more field trips or group trips.  Dr. Jansma also suggested a yearly retreat.  I think that these are both great suggestions, and this is already being addressed with some of the REU plans.  I would go a step further and suggest that people from the two universities physically meet periodically; maybe once per quarter; face-to-face meetings are essential.

Final comments

I certainly do not want to give the impression that I am disappointed in CSAPS.  The fact that the center exists at all is a great accomplishment, and it definitely presents unique interdisciplinary views and opportunities.  Overall, the collaboration between UArk and OSU is heading in the right direction and great dividends lay in store for all of us.

Michael W. Blair, Graduate student
Physics Department, OSU

"The importance of solar wind in the production of "space weathering" features on the Moon and on asteroids" by Kareev et al. (UArk)

"Cathodoluminescence color indices as a parameter for measuring petrologic changes in meteorites" by Meier et al. (UArk)

"Grain size and density separation on asteroids: Comparison of seismic shaking and fluidization" by Benoit et al. (UArk)

"Eros sulfur deficiency: A closer look at meteorite comparisons" by Kracher et al. (UArk)

"The origin of chondrites: Metal-silicate separation experiments under microgravity conditions–II" by Moore et al. (UArk)

"The HERA multiple near-earth asteroid sample return mission: Selection of the target asteroids" by Sears et al. (UArk)

"Martian gullies and the stability of water in the martian environment" by Thompson et al. (REU student, 2002, UArk)

"Currently flowing water on Mars" by T. Motazedian (REU student, 2002)

The Himalayas, created by the collision of India with Asia, which began 50 million years ago, is an ideal locale for understanding the response of continents to plate tectonic forces.  Sedimentary rocks that once made up the leading edge of India today form the summits of Himalayan peaks.  The distribution of rock types within the range has, for over one hundred years, inspired theories of crustal metamorphism that have been exported to explain aspects of other mountain belts.  Over the past 25 years, a number of models have been proposed that make quantitative predictions regarding the evolution of the Himalayas.

We have been able to test these models only recently by directly determining the timing of metamorphism.  Th-Pb dating of small (~10 µm sized) mineral grains found in rocks obtained adjacent to the Main Central Thrust, the crustal-scale fault that created the highest mountain range on this planet, yield remarkably young ages and indicates that the thrust has been active ~18 million years more recently than previously reported.  As is often the case in science, understanding the largest features requires knowledge of the microscale; the signal with which to explain the processes involved when two continents collide is preserved within crystals only 10 µms in size.

To explore the extent of this exciting result and identify recent activity along the Main Central Thrust, Drs. Catlos and Marston and their Indian collaborators, Drs. C. S. Dubey and A. C. Pandey,