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

User Tools

Trace:
private:teleconsnotes20170802

Differences

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

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision
private:teleconsnotes20170802 [2017/08/02 15:49] – jbockprivate:teleconsnotes20170802 [2017/08/02 16:12] (current) – jbock
Line 1: Line 1:
 ====== Telecon Notes 20170802 ====== ====== Telecon Notes 20170802 ======
  
-Attendance: Al, Julian, Jamie, Jeff, Clem\\+Attendance: Al, Julian, Jamie, Jeff, Clem, Charles\\
 Notes by: Jamie\\ Notes by: Jamie\\
  
Line 52: Line 52:
 Clem:  is there a LiteBird or CORE++ model we can compare with?\\ Clem:  is there a LiteBird or CORE++ model we can compare with?\\
 Yes, though there are differences and limitations from what these groups have done\\ Yes, though there are differences and limitations from what these groups have done\\
 +For example CORE++ has moved beyond PISM, machinery already exists\\
  
-Action items from last week:\\ +Update from the Technology WG:\\ 
- - contact Kovac about a probe talk at Harvard S4 workshop (Shaul called)\\ +Jeff and Roger have been working on a detector technology plan for team-X\\ 
- - communicate with John Carlstrom to share resources with S4 (reply pending)\\ +Getting some input from LTD, baselining TES+TDM SQUIDS for the probe\\ 
-Primary work on spectrometer has been on foregrounds\\ +Then we would outline what the CMB community has done, and diverse future improvements\\ 
-Spectrometer has shallow sensitivity up to several THz\\ +Optical coupling can be left open, highlighting diversity of approaches\\ 
-May offer some useful information for deep imager data over narrower range of frequencies\\ +Plan to circulate the report more widely to gather input and support\\ 
-What is the utility of high-frequency data given things like decorrelation?\\ +Jamie:  one danger is that NASA technology support is attached to named missions in the decadal\\ 
-The spectrometer will provide good information on dust opacity and spectral index\\ +We should be concerned that the probe study is for a mission class, not a named mission\\ 
-It is less clear if this knowledge will prove useful at nK sensitivities\\ +Therefore it could fall out of long-term technology funding, and we should anticipate writing a technology white paper to justify continued investment\\ 
-Can the effect of decorrelation be included in Al's simulation?\\ +High-frequency channels can be done with a non-antenna approach, but want a science case\\ 
-Shaul:  what is the effect of mismatched angular resolution?  Is there scope for increasing it?\\ +The other questions from Shaul can be addressed in the Imager telecon\\
-Charles:  we can't assume we will know the spectral properties of the dust\\ +
-Question is does the spectrometer provide essential information for foreground removal?\\ +
-Jamie:  On the time-scale of October, we should base our decision on what science each instrument would deliver.  The questions about complementarity on foregrounds is not something we are going to resolve by October, and it will be a challenge even by the end of the study.\\ +
-Jamie:  Can a probe-class spectrometer access useful phase space on inflation?\\ +
-Al:  Probably not, but I can quantify especially in combination with an imager.\\ +
-Can we get a picture of MIDEX/PIXIE to get some idea of physical size?\\+
  
-Systematics working group has been collected, reviewing existing tools and knowledge.\\ 
-Has gotten input from Colin Bischoff on S4 work.\\ 
-Also a presentation from CORE.\\ 
  
  
  
private/teleconsnotes20170802.1501706972.txt.gz · Last modified: 2017/08/02 15:49 by jbock

Page Tools