Campuses:
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision | |||
private:teleconsnotes20180411 [2018/04/11 15:06] – kyoung | private:teleconsnotes20180411 [2018/04/11 15:37] (current) – kyoung | ||
---|---|---|---|
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
====== Telecon Notes April 11, 2018 ====== | ====== Telecon Notes April 11, 2018 ====== | ||
- | Attendance: Nick, Dan, Amy, Hannes, Shaul | + | Attendance: Nick, Dan, Amy, Hannes, Shaul, Dave |
Notes by: Karl | Notes by: Karl | ||
Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
Status of TeamX outcomes (Amy) | Status of TeamX outcomes (Amy) | ||
+ | * Have draft instrument study (last week). Amy, Brian commenting on that. Combining comments today and TeamX will return to those comments on Monday. | ||
+ | * This refinement is 1st pass. Will have 2nd review case before report goes to SOMA. | ||
+ | * Expecting mission TeamX Thursday. | ||
+ | * SH: Basic process. | ||
Update on requirements (Shaul, Dan, Raphael, ...) | Update on requirements (Shaul, Dan, Raphael, ...) | ||
+ | * Noise estimates have been 'best case estimate' | ||
+ | * NASA also expects a ' | ||
+ | * Driver is level 1 science goals. | ||
+ | * Raphael talking with fundamental phys group on r driver. | ||
+ | * current suggestion of 5 x 10^-5 for sigma(r). | ||
+ | * This needs to be propagated through to a noise threshold. | ||
+ | * Doesn' | ||
+ | * Dan: agree. Raphael doesn' | ||
+ | * SH: Do we really need a requirement? | ||
+ | * AT: It's needed. Other groups are doing requirements / margins. | ||
+ | * SH: Makes sense. Also when compared to LB, S4, etc. it will likely be useful and maybe expected by community. | ||
+ | |||
Workshop | Workshop | ||
- | * discussion sessions: what are the questions we want addressed during the discussion? | + | * SH: Useful to give leads some guidance. Questions to ask. Deliverables afterword. Things to write up. etc. These would be prepared and given to folks ahead of time. |
- | * Fundamental Physics: what is the r goal? where is the constraint on N_eff comes from and the complementarity with Ground (contributed by Dan Green)? | + | * Dan: was envisioning panelists have few slides of their own to start with (they have advanced notice of our interests) rather than passing panelists questions cold. |
- | * Extragalactic: | + | * know each panelists will have their own project they' |
- | * Foregrounds: | + | * SH: sure seems reasonable. |
- | * Technology: what do we want to write in terms of technology readiness, maturation, and additional areas for NASA investment? | + | * Dan: also thinking that (for Fund. Phys.) the big picture issues, i.e. r, have been covered. so panel ask 'Are we missing possible science targets?' |
+ | * SH: Yes. good question to ask. | ||
+ | * discussion sessions: what are the questions we want addressed during the discussion? | ||
+ | | ||
+ | * Dan: Are there other science targets well suited to space? | ||
+ | | ||
+ | * Extragalactic: | ||
+ | * Foregrounds: | ||
+ | * Technology: what do we want to write in terms of technology readiness, maturation, and additional areas for NASA investment? | ||
* What other deliverables: | * What other deliverables: | ||
+ | * Nick: Organize possible white papers? | ||
+ | |||