2017 August 23

Attendance: Charles, Al, Amy

Notes by Amy

Topic: feedback on Shaul's draft slides for S4 meeting

Slides 5,6: figures have two sets of frequency axis labels that don’t line up

Slide 13: Misspelled Kogut as Kogus

Slide 13: Didn’t capitalize Flauger

Charles: Slide 6 plot doesn’t really show ground based atmospheric lines, including near foreground minimum. Perhaps add another figure showing atmospheric transmission vs frequency.

Charles: If we're talking about complementary, may want to mention strengths of suborbital in addition to strengths of space. Recombination bump, high resolution science cheaper than space.

Charles: Slides talk about access to low l's but really its a trio: Space gives access to * lowest l with the * systematics control and * foregrounds on those angular scales.

Al: real concern is when we’re interfacing with S4, (maybe not in slides but in comments)… both S4 and Probe concept need to be careful to give the same message headquarters lest HQ decides that only one is needed. Including things ground doesn’t get us that space does. Don’t want HQ to think that the CMB community things a ground mission alone can get the full range of science.

Al: Slide 14 ought to say its important that both ground based and NASA side are saying the same thing. Don’t want mixed messages. Maybe be best couched in terms of sigmas - sigmar, sigmanf

Charles: “PICO” name is fine. Calling it ”CMBPol” would be more recognizable/communicative, but no strong feeling about it.