NSAC Members 2018

NSAC Members for 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013-12 | 2011 |2010 | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | 2004-5 | 2004 | 2003 | 2001-2 | 2000-1

DOE/NSF Nuclear Science Advisory Committee 2018 Membership List
Mei Bai Accelerator Operations GSI Helmholtzzentrum für Schwerionenforschung GmbH Darnstadt Germany	Silvia Jurisson Department of Chemistry University of Missouri Columbia, Missouri 65211
Helen Caines Department of Physics Yale University New Haven, Connecticut 06520	Cynthia Keppel Jefferson Lab Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility Newport News, Virginia 23606
David Dean (2018 APS ex-Officio) Physics Division Oak Ridge National Laboratory Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37831	Yury Kolomensky Department of Physics University of California Berkeley, California
Jozef Dudek Physics Department College of William and Mary Williamsburg, Virginia 23185	Suzanne Lapi (2018 SNMMI ex-Officio) Department of Radiology University of Alabama Birmingham, Alabama 35294
Olga Evdokimov Department of Physics University of Illinois Chicago, Illinois 60607	Zein-Eddine Meziani Physics Division Argonne National Laboratory Argonne, Illinois 60439
Lynn Francesconi (2018 ACS ex-Officio) Hunter College New York, New York 10065	Jeffrey Nico Radiation Physics Division National Institute of Standards and Technology Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899
George Fuller Department of Physics University of California San Diego, California 92093	Daniel Phillips Department of Physics & Astronomy Ohio University Athens, Ohio 45701
Geoffrey Greene Physics Division University of Tennessee Knoxville, Tennessee 37996	Sofia Quaglioni Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Livermore, California 94551
David Hertzog (Chair) Department of Physics University of Washington Seattle, Washington 98195	Krishna Rajagopal Department of Physics Massachusetts Institute of Technology Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139
Kate Jones Department of Physics & Astronomy University of Tennessee Knoxville, Tennessee 37996	Artemis Spyrou National Superconducting Cyclotron Laboratory Michigan State University East Lansing, Michigan 48824

Highlights

View all Highlights

Graph comparing a neutron star with a quark-matter core vs. a nuclear matter core in mass vs. radius. The quark matter core star would have less mass and radius than the nuclear matter core, as stars with smaller radii and more mass are too unstable.

New Clues on Twin Neutron Stars and the Extreme Physics Inside

Scientists have new insights into factors that determine how twin neutron stars—stars with the same mass but different sizes and compositions—can coexist.

Illustration of alpha fusion processes in stars and reactions used on Earth floating above an image of the Earth

Predictive Theory Revises Understanding of Alpha Processes During the Big Bang and in Massive Stars

Theoretical calculations enable more accurate determination of reaction rates for modelling primordial lithium-6 abundance and massive stars’ lifecycle.

sub nav