Campuses:
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revision | ||
| private:teleconsnotes20170920 [2017/09/20 15:51] – lknox | private:teleconsnotes20170920 [2017/09/27 14:47] (current) – hanany | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| ====== Telecon Notes 20170920 ====== | ====== Telecon Notes 20170920 ====== | ||
| - | Attendance: | + | Attendance: |
| - | Notes by: \\ | + | Notes by: |
| === Agenda === | === Agenda === | ||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
| === Notes ==== | === Notes ==== | ||
| - | * Taken by Lloyd | + | |
| * Foreground workshop dates are set to be Nov 29 to Dec 1. Location is UCSD. | * Foreground workshop dates are set to be Nov 29 to Dec 1. Location is UCSD. | ||
| * Science and complementarity workshop: JC proposed to keep S4 separate from an April/May Probe and decadal panel meeting. And have S4 in week of March 5 to 9. SH says that could work if we have a day or day and a half for complementarity. JC and S4 are going ahead looking at a 2-day or 2.5 day workshop, really focused on governance. JC still prefers a two separate workshop solution. Julian points out benefits to having these two workshops right next to each other, with some overlap. Chair selected by end of 2018. Julian and Lloyd to discuss at CMB-S4 ICCC meeting next week and report back. | * Science and complementarity workshop: JC proposed to keep S4 separate from an April/May Probe and decadal panel meeting. And have S4 in week of March 5 to 9. SH says that could work if we have a day or day and a half for complementarity. JC and S4 are going ahead looking at a 2-day or 2.5 day workshop, really focused on governance. JC still prefers a two separate workshop solution. Julian points out benefits to having these two workshops right next to each other, with some overlap. Chair selected by end of 2018. Julian and Lloyd to discuss at CMB-S4 ICCC meeting next week and report back. | ||
| Line 28: | Line 28: | ||
| * SH: has anything came up that will impact design of the mission? BC: far sidelobes may be at the top of that list. PUshes for more baffling, fewer reflections, | * SH: has anything came up that will impact design of the mission? BC: far sidelobes may be at the top of that list. PUshes for more baffling, fewer reflections, | ||
| * SH: we talked a bit today about 1/f. HWP? Of, if 1/f is driven by systematics then baseline a... [I missed it.] We're looking for big coarse decisions. BC: I don't think at this point we've hit anything that points to requiring HWP. BC: not so scared by bandpass mismatch as much as optical things like far sidelobes. | * SH: we talked a bit today about 1/f. HWP? Of, if 1/f is driven by systematics then baseline a... [I missed it.] We're looking for big coarse decisions. BC: I don't think at this point we've hit anything that points to requiring HWP. BC: not so scared by bandpass mismatch as much as optical things like far sidelobes. | ||
| + | * BC: the thing about sidelobes is I feel like no one's quite got it right yet, with space missions. Everything with a risk factor greater than 2 will have to be dealt with somehow. | ||
| + | * SH: next step is what of those items that are the highest risk can we do anything about, and that will impact the probe design and what are the things that are important but will take longer to work on, that are beyond the scope of this probe study. | ||
| + | * BC: repeating back. WE want to identify the most likely to be the limits to this mission. Pick out some to go into over the next few months based on where progress can be made. | ||
| + | * SH: yes. Let's take side lobes. Is it a fundamental limitation for us? I dont' know. But we do want in the end to say "1/f, beam mismatch that can be potentially be dealt with with wave plate or scan strategy, we have checked and we can deal with them." But SH is worried side lobes are too hard to deal with. BC: maybe we can think of clever ways to place constraints. AT: There are already several things listed in this table that should be impacting our design, adn the way we are prioritizing effort on the design. | ||
| + | * SH: when table is complete, come back to the EC with suggestions of what to work on more. BC: I hope that will happen in two weeks. We report to EC. | ||
| + | * Data challenge: Shaul, Lloyd, Julian to touch base off line about how DC and FG workshop, and all ties together. | ||