Report - School of Physics

Introduction & Background
Following an agreement to cooperate on science planning issues, the executives of
the European Southern Observatory (ESO) and the European Space Agency (ESA)
Science Programme and representatives of their science advisory structures have
met to share information and to identify potential synergies within their future
projects. The agreement arose from their joint founding membership of EIROforum
(http://www.eiroforum.org) and a recognition that, as pan-European organisations,
they served essentially the same scientific community.
At a meeting at ESO in Garching during September 2003, it was agreed to establish
a number of working groups that would be tasked to explore these synergies in
important areas of mutual interest and to make recommendations to both organisations.
The chair and co-chair of each group were to be chosen by the executives but
thereafter, the groups would be free to select their membership and to act independently
of the sponsoring organisations. The first working group to be established
was on the topic of Extra-Solar Planet research, both detection and physical study,
over a period extending from now until around 2015. The group worked on its report
from June until December 2004 and reported its conclusions and recommendations
to a second ESA-ESO meeting, held at ESA HQ in Paris in February 2005.
Terms of Reference and Composition
The goals set for the working group were to provide:
• A survey of the field: this will comprise: (a) a review of the methods used
or envisaged for extra-solar planet detection and study; (b) a survey of the
associated instrumentation world-wide (operational, planned, or proposed, onground
and in space); (c) for each, a summary of the potential targets, accuracy
and sensitivity limits, and scientific capabilities and limitations.
• An examination of the role of ESO and ESA facilities: this will: (a) identify
areas in which current and planned ESA and ESO facilities will contribute;
(b) analyse the expected scientific returns and risks of each; (c) identify areas
of potential scientific overlap, and thus assess the extent to which the facilities
complement or compete; (d) identify open areas which merit attention by one
or both organisations (for example, follow-up observations by ESO to maximise
the return from other major facilities); (e) conclude on the scientific case for
the very large facilities planned or proposed.
ii