Campuses:
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Next revision | Previous revision | ||
| imagerteleconnotes20180425 [2018/04/25 11:55] – created kyoung | imagerteleconnotes20180425 [2018/04/25 16:04] (current) – wenxx181 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| ====== Telecon 20180425 ====== | ====== Telecon 20180425 ====== | ||
| - | Attending: | + | Attending: |
| Notes by : Qi | Notes by : Qi | ||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
| === Agenda=== | === Agenda=== | ||
| + | * [[http:// | ||
| * Comparing NETS: PICO, CORE, LiteBIRD | * Comparing NETS: PICO, CORE, LiteBIRD | ||
| - | * {{:: | + | * {{:: |
| | | ||
| === Notes === | === Notes === | ||
| + | |||
| + | * link for workshop | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | * Noise comparison (Karl) | ||
| + | * page 2 | ||
| + | * left is in log scale, right is just a zoom for low frequencies | ||
| + | * a few changes: | ||
| + | * 4 years to 5 years, after Mission study meeting, ~900M, still 10% less than cap | ||
| + | * 10% loss from low-pass filters. Planck had ~15%. There are 3-4 elements, each has ~3% loss. | ||
| + | * Bandwidth, optical efficiencies and temperatures are the main factors that distinguish experiments. | ||
| + | * PICO: 25% top-hat bandwidth, 70% optical efficiency (lenselet+loss+bolo) | ||
| + | * Karl is going to check with Jaques if spillover was included in optical efficiency for CORE; check with Toki if he can bring more numbers here for next week's workshop | ||
| + | * CORE has higher load in high-v, probably due to both warm mirrors (and warm stop) | ||
| + | * LiteBird: data not very available; from 2016 paper. Small pixel size, thus large spillover leads to low efficiency. | ||
| + | * Conclusion: all similar, most difference is high frequency due to mirror temperatures. | ||
| + | * page 3 | ||
| + | * 6K is not totally hypothetical; | ||
| + | * temperature stability at 6K | ||
| + | * Planck' | ||
| + | * Bill: 95% observing time for 5 years may be optimistic. | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||