Self-organization is a property of dissipative nonlinear processes that are governed by an internal driver and a positive feedback mechanism, which creates regular geometric and/or temporal patterns and decreases the entropy, in contrast to random processes. Here we investigate for the first time a comprehensive number of 16 self-organization processes that operate in planetary physics, solar physics, stellar physics, galactic physics, and cosmology. Self-organizing systems create spontaneous {\sl order out of chaos}, during the evolution from an initially disordered system to an ordered stationary system, via quasi-periodic limit-cycle dynamics, harmonic mechanical resonances, or gyromagnetic resonances. The internal driver can be gravity, rotation, thermal pressure, or acceleration of nonthermal particles, while the positive feedback mechanism is often an instability, such as the magneto-rotational instability, the Rayleigh-B\'enard convection instability, turbulence, vortex attraction, magnetic reconnection, plasma condensation, or loss-cone instability. Physical models of astrophysical self-organization processes involve hydrodynamic, MHD, and N-body formulations of Lotka-Volterra equation systems.

The Large Synoptic Survey Telescope is designed to provide an unprecedented optical imaging dataset that will support investigations of our Solar System, Galaxy and Universe, across half the sky and over ten years of repeated observation. However, exactly how the LSST observations will be taken (the observing strategy or "cadence") is not yet finalized. In this dynamically-evolving community white paper, we explore how the detailed performance of the anticipated science investigations is expected to depend on small changes to the LSST observing strategy. Using realistic simulations of the LSST schedule and observation properties, we design and compute diagnostic metrics and Figures of Merit that provide quantitative evaluations of different observing strategies, analyzing their impact on a wide range of proposed science projects. This is work in progress: we are using this white paper to communicate to each other the relative merits of the observing strategy choices that could be made, in an effort to maximize the scientific value of the survey. The investigation of some science cases leads to suggestions for new strategies that could be simulated and potentially adopted. Notably, we find motivation for exploring departures from a spatially uniform annual tiling of the sky: focusing instead on different parts of the survey area in different years in a "rolling cadence" is likely to have significant benefits for a number of time domain and moving object astronomy projects. The communal assembly of a suite of quantified and homogeneously coded metrics is the vital first step towards an automated, systematic, science-based assessment of any given cadence simulation, that will enable the scheduling of the LSST to be as well-informed as possible.

Responding to calls from the National Science Foundation (NSF) for new proposals to measure the gravitational constant $G$, we offer an interesting experiment in deep space employing the classic gravity train mechanism. Our setup requires three bodies: a larger layered solid sphere with a cylindrical hole through its center, a much smaller retroreflector which will undergo harmonic motion within the hole and a host spacecraft with laser ranging capabilities to measure round trip light-times to the retroreflector but ultimately separated a significant distance away from the sphere-retroreflector apparatus. Measurements of the period of oscillation of the retroreflector in terms of host spacecraft clock time using existing technology could give determinations of $G$ nearly three orders of magnitude more accurate than current measurements here on Earth. However, significant engineering advances in the release mechanism of the apparatus from the host spacecraft will likely be necessary. Issues with regard to the stability of the system are briefly addressed.

We offer a response to recent claims that a constant $G$ measurement model with an additional Gaussian noise term fits the experimental data better than a model containing periodic terms.

About a dozen measurements of Newton's gravitational constant, G, since 1962 have yielded values that differ by far more than their reported random plus systematic errors. We find that these values for G are oscillatory in nature, with a period of P = 5.899 +/- 0.062 yr, an amplitude of (1.619 +/- 0.103) x 10^{-14} m^3 kg^{-1} s^{-2}, and mean-value crossings in 1994 and 1997. However, we do not suggest that G is actually varying by this much, this quickly, but instead that something in the measurement process varies. Of other recently reported results, to the best of our knowledge, the only measurement with the same period and phase is the Length of Day (LOD - defined as a frequency measurement such that a positive increase in LOD values means slower Earth rotation rates and therefore longer days). The aforementioned period is also about half of a solar activity cycle, but the correlation is far less convincing. The 5.9 year periodic signal in LOD has previously been interpreted as due to fluid core motions and inner-core coupling. We report the G/LOD correlation, whose statistical significance is 0.99764 assuming no difference in phase, without claiming to have any satisfactory explanation for it. Least unlikely, perhaps, are currents in the Earth's fluid core that change both its moment of inertia (affecting LOD) and the circumstances in which the Earth-based experiments measure G. In this case, there might be correlations with terrestrial magnetic field measurements.

Black holes are now commonplace, among the stars, in Galactic centers, and perhaps other places. But within living memory, their very existence was doubted by many, and few chose to look for them. Zeldovich and Guseinov were first, followed by Trimble and Thorne, using a method that would have identified HDE 226868 as a plausible candidate, if it had been in the 1968 catalogue of spectroscopic binaries. That it was not arose from an unhappy accident in the observing program of Daniel M. Popper long before the discovery of X-ray binaries and the identification of Cygnus X-1 with that hot, massive star and its collapsed companion.

Radio astronomy began with one array (Jansky's) and one paraboloid of revolution (Reber's) as collecting areas and has now reached the point where a large number of facilities are arrays of paraboloids, each of which would have looked enormous to Reber in 1932. In the process, interferometry has contributed to the counting of radio sources, establishing superluminal velocities in AGN jets, mapping of sources from the bipolar cow shape on up to full grey-scale and colored images, determining spectral energy distributions requiring non-thermal emission processes, and much else. The process has not been free of competition and controversy, at least partly because it is just a little difficult to understand how earth-rotation, aperture-synthesis interferometry works. Some very important results, for instance the mapping of HI in the Milky Way to reveal spiral arms, warping, and flaring, actually came from single moderate-sized paraboloids. The entry of China into the radio astronomy community has given large (40-110 meter) paraboloids a new lease on life.

The recent literature of astronomy and cosmology has included a good many suggestions for "who first recognized the expansion of the universe?" with cases having been made for Lemaitre, Lundmark, de Sitter, Slipher, Shapley, Friedmann, Wirtz, and perhaps others. I touch on these but also mention others (some of whose names have not come down to us) who might reasonably be credited with some part of the basic idea, but conclude that "Hubble's Law" is the right choice ("because it was discovered by Lundmark" in accordance with Stigler's Law). Of course there are a couple of previously unsung heroes (Dose and Zoellner), and the discussion bears some traces of its origin as an after-dinner talk. The full context goes back to ideas from China and forward to the struggle to correct Hubble's erroneous value of his constant.

A survey that can cover the sky in optical bands over wide fields to faint magnitudes with a fast cadence will enable many of the exciting science opportunities of the next decade. The Large Synoptic Survey Telescope (LSST) will have an effective aperture of 6.7 meters and an imaging camera with field of view of 9.6 deg^2, and will be devoted to a ten-year imaging survey over 20,000 deg^2 south of +15 deg. Each pointing will be imaged 2000 times with fifteen second exposures in six broad bands from 0.35 to 1.1 microns, to a total point-source depth of r~27.5. The LSST Science Book describes the basic parameters of the LSST hardware, software, and observing plans. The book discusses educational and outreach opportunities, then goes on to describe a broad range of science that LSST will revolutionize: mapping the inner and outer Solar System, stellar populations in the Milky Way and nearby galaxies, the structure of the Milky Way disk and halo and other objects in the Local Volume, transient and variable objects both at low and high redshift, and the properties of normal and active galaxies at low and high redshift. It then turns to far-field cosmological topics, exploring properties of supernovae to z~1, strong and weak lensing, the large-scale distribution of galaxies and baryon oscillations, and how these different probes may be combined to constrain cosmological models and the physics of dark energy.

We review the present status of cosmological discoveries and how these confirm our modern cosmological model, but at the same time we try to focus on its weaknesses and inconsistencies with an historical perspective, and foresee how the on-going big cosmological projects may change in the future our view of the universe.

A summary of JENAM 2008 Symposium 9 "Star Formation from Spitzer (Lyman) to Spitzer (Space Telescope) and Beyond", held in Vienna, 10-12 September 2008.

The fastest pulsar and the slowest nova; the oldest galaxies and the youngest stars; the weirdest life forms and the commonest dwarfs; the highest energy particles and the lowest energy photons. These were some of the extremes of Astrophysics 2006. We attempt also to bring you updates on things of which there is currently only one (habitable planets, the Sun, and the universe) and others of which there are always many, like meteors and molecules, black holes and binaries.

We report observations with the Chandra X-ray Observatory of the single, cool, magnetic white dwarf GD 356. For consistent comparison with other X-ray observations of single white dwarfs, we also re-analyzed archival ROSAT data for GD 356 (GJ 1205), G 99-47 (GR 290 = V1201 Ori), GD 90, G 195-19 (EG250 = GJ 339.1), and WD 2316+123 and archival Chandra data for LHS 1038 (GJ 1004) and GD 358 (V777 Her). Our Chandra observation detected no X rays from GD 356, setting the most restrictive upper limit to the X-ray luminosity from any cool white dwarf -- L_{X} < 6.0 x 10^{25} ergs/s, at 99.7% confidence, for a 1-keV thermal-bremsstrahlung spectrum. The corresponding limit to the electron density is n_{0} < 4.4 x 10^{11} cm^{-3}. Our re-analysis of the archival data confirmed the non-detections reported by the original investigators. We discuss the implications of our and prior observations on models for coronal emission from white dwarfs. For magnetic white dwarfs, we emphasize the more stringent constraints imposed by cyclotron radiation. In addition, we describe (in an appendix) a statistical methodology for detecting a source and for constraining the strength of a source, which applies even when the number of source or background events is small.

Research done during the previous century established our Standard Cosmological Model. There are many details still to be filled in, but few would seriously doubt the basic premise. Past surveys have revealed that the large-scale distribution of galaxies in the Universe is far from random: it is highly structured over a vast range of scales. To describe cosmic structures, we need to build mathematically quantifiable descriptions of structure. Identifying where scaling laws apply and the nature of those scaling laws is an important part of understanding which physical mechanisms have been responsible for the organization of clusters, superclusters of galaxies and the voids between them. Finding where these scaling laws are broken is equally important since this indicates the transition to different underlying physics. In describing scaling laws we are helped by making analogies with fractals: mathematical constructs that can possess a wide variety of scaling properties. We must beware, however, of saying that the Universe is a fractal on some range of scales: it merely exhibits a specific kind of fractal-like behavior on those scales. We exploit the richness of fractal scaling behavior merely as an important supplement to the usual battery of statistical descriptors. We review the history of how we have learned about the structure of the Universe and present the data and methodologies that are relevant to the question of discovering and understanding any scaling properties that structure may have. The ultimate goal is to have a complete understanding of how that structure emerged. We are getting close!