Go to the U of M home page
School of Physics & Astronomy
Probe Mission Study Wiki
foregroundstelecon20210701

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision
foregroundstelecon20210701 [2021/08/19 11:19] hananyforegroundstelecon20210701 [2021/08/19 11:36] (current) hanany
Line 16: Line 16:
  
   * Ragnhild thinks that C2 estimation of CMB spectra is ok. Proceeding forward.    * Ragnhild thinks that C2 estimation of CMB spectra is ok. Proceeding forward. 
-  * {{ ::nilc_pico_20210701.pdf | MR shows an update}}+  * {{ ::nilc_pico_20210701.pdf | MR shows an update with results for model 96}}. Kris suggests to integrate the likelihoods to get proper limits.  
 +    * Kris: you are doing r=0.003 and r = 0; but what if you have small r, but non-zero? Why are we using r =0.003?  
 +    * Some discussion about the level of delensing. Why are we using 60%? **SH to contact Julien Caron**.  
 +    * Kris: What are you assuming about the spectral index for synchrotron? We should not assume a uniform spectral index. What beta per pixel? **notes are not clear about the answer** 
 +  * Kris discusses his small scale synchrotron model: model is phenomenological, not physically motivated. It is tweaked to insert small scale 'mathematically', but not to violate what's know about the sky.  
 +    * He takes Planck 353 GHz dust and modifies it. So the small scale synchrotron would be highly correlated with Planck's dust in small patches of the sky. 
foregroundstelecon20210701.1629389995.txt.gz · Last modified: 2021/08/19 11:19 by hanany