Campuses:
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revision | ||
| foregroundstelecon20211013 [2021/10/14 09:57] – hanany | foregroundstelecon20211013 [2021/10/20 22:37] (current) – hanany | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
| [[https:// | [[https:// | ||
| - | Attendance: Shaul, Jacques, | + | Attendance: Shaul, Jacques, |
| Regrets: | Regrets: | ||
| Line 17: | Line 18: | ||
| === Notes: === | === Notes: === | ||
| | | ||
| + | * Julien + Sebastian: Clem produced maps but foreground information drops at \ell=1500. For S4 power does not drop for some models. **Shaul will check with Clem**. | ||
| + | * JD: PySM is an nside=512 which gives \ell = 1500. They are working on increasing nside but it isn't ready yet. PSM maps have information going to \ell=5000. | ||
| + | * SH: do we need information at high \ell? JD shows spectra of dust maps between 40-220 GHz that show power to high \ell | ||
| + | * Julien: S4 needed only minimal separation using the central frequency bands. This is not an issue for a small clean patch, but may be an issue for 50% of the sky | ||
| + | * Kris: what about point sources? | ||
| + | * JD: for CORE we have done cleaning at nside=2048. | ||
| + | |||
| + | * SH show proposal for paper figures. See below. Need to communicate with MR. | ||
| * Paper: Proposal for NILC Figures | * Paper: Proposal for NILC Figures | ||
| * Start with r=0.003 | * Start with r=0.003 | ||
| Line 27: | Line 36: | ||
| * r=0 | * r=0 | ||
| * same as above | * same as above | ||
| + | |||
| + | * Charles gives outline for gap list paper (see below). SH: there is a specific form that needs to be filled. We need to highlight urgency, such as ' | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | Hi Shaul & Co.: | ||
| + | |||
| + | As promised, here's a draft outline of the case for broadening the frequency range of the tech gap list on CMB detectors. | ||
| + | |||
| + | 1. Intro | ||
| + | statement of what we're writing about. | ||
| + | |||
| + | 2. high frequency (now 600, we'll argue to raise to 800) | ||
| + | results of simulations, | ||
| + | at least one figure. | ||
| + | |||
| + | 3. low frequency (now 30, we'll argue to lower to 10) | ||
| + | " | ||
| + | if we have any simulation results that seem relevant, we'll use them, otherwise say that we don't yet. | ||
| + | |||
| + | 4. summary | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | Charles | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||