====== Telecon Notes 20171101 ====== Attendance: Raphael, Amy, Shaul, Al, Eric, Brendon, Nick, Charles, Lloyd, Jamie \\ Notes by: Karl \\ === Agenda === * Brief: authorship policy on papers/abstracts * {{:private:lrvshr.pdf|Update from Fundamental Physics Group (Raphael)}} * {{:private:spectrometerimagermatrix.pdf|Spectrometer/Imager discussion}} === Notes === Authorship policy on papers/abstracts * Shaul: proposal, for each abstract poll EC and relevant WGs. People then ask to be included. * Raphael: just small group on abstract? or endorsers as well? * Shaul: these are just updates, not final word. so endorsers not needed. Will be needed for final report. * No objections. Update from Fundamental Physics Group (Raphael) * comparing low-res and hi-res cases (140cm vs 50cm) * forecasts with foregrounds. synchrotron from WMAP/Planck. dust is 2-component Finkbeiner. * no frequency decorrelation between foregrounds * foreground removal via minimum variance ILC * done for polarization * more work to extend to r. as foregrounds have larger effect. Need more tools for that estimation. * current presentation is signals in T and TE. * Shaul: also calculate r limits with no foregrounds, for reference. * parameter forcasts done. * all at 70% of sky. CL: this is reasonable. * for LCDM, 2 cases very similar * LCDM + X, goes from competative with S4 (Neff) to not. 140 cm to 50 cm. * Neff is large sacrifice. Neff is at 70% of sky * delensing also worse with lo-res. * hi-res has A_lens 17%, lo-res is ~ 2x higher. still running. * large mission needed to do delensing and Neff in PICO. * Charles: a probe mission needs to be able to do all analysis with its own data. Not relying on other data sets that are lower quality. * Raphael: if combining with S4 noise is likely ok, but S4 has less sky coverage. * Amy: risk in proposing with dependency on other data. * Shaul: saying PICO only worth pursuing after data sets PICO depends on are complete or nearly so. * Shaul: PICO small, like LITEBird, foreground cleaning method unclear. Would need a way to say small experiment looking at reionization peak can put low limits on r. * Al: could do imager at < 200 GHz for low foregrounds and reionization peak. plus spectrometer for high frequency. does high frequency from space. * Raphael: could be good straight B-mode mission. Spectrometer/Imager discussion (continues above suggestions) * Shaul's science matrix. in process. Goal: capture science of imager and spectrometer. missing galactic science * spectrometer science * Al: constraints on mu with no detection are still useful. best limit on primordial spectrum and running. also give probe on light DM canidates via their annihlation. * remove foregrounds, some doubt this is the method needed. Al convinced spectrometer is needed. * CIB -- get evolution of star formation and cold gas. mini-PIXIE does this in CII, some CO transitions. * Shaul: quantify S/N. explain measurement, analysis, which constrains ____. Provide this story for final table. * Eric: this is being worked on in community. process is still evolving in field. * Jamie: at low redshift, can this be done with big beam? * Eric: must cross correlate. probes linear scales which is good. Will think more about science case story. * Shaul: hard for an evolving method to be a strong science driver. * Imager science: * fundamental physics (see Raphael's presentation), * extra-galactic science (in process). hi-resolution important for these point sources. * galactic science to be added (also discussed in past telecon) * General discussion: * Al: pixie review comments, * panel didn't see need for space was compelling. if ground based observes r first, then PIXIE isn't worth it. * Jamie: was this because PIXIE wouldn't give the definitive measurement? As was done for past CMB observables. * Al: not clear. * Lloyd: reviewer missed something. we need to communicate context better in case when mission follows a ground based detection. * Al: seems that NASA perception is once B-mode detected no further work is needed. Alternative argument needs to be made clearly. * Shaul: panel questioning if inflation is a 1 number science (r). need to address this for imager or spectrometer PICO. Could avoid by proposing Super-PIXE and get other observables as focus. * Jamie: if spectrometer can test inflation from different observables that is a nice story. * Shaul: not clear that small PIXIE can do this. so not so exciting. * Charles: agree. big spectrometer is more interesting. Responding to 'are you done if r measured from ground? Imager gets r and tau. Many experiments assuming tau, but need space to measure this. r and tau measured at level unachievable from ground are enough to justify probe. The rest is gravy. * Al: that's what PIXIE promised, but wasn't selected. * Lloyd: what about pushing on broader anisotropies questions? * Charles: having 1 primary goal + bonus has been a better pitch. * Lloyd: if r is detected, then push to map power spectrum to reionization peak, needed to see scale invariant spectrum to largest scales. The confirmation itself is important, mapping the power spectrum. * Raphael: not sure there are models that do this. reionizaiton bump useful to measure spectral index.