Telecon Notes April 18, 2018
Attendance: Shaul, Dan, Bill, Charles, Nick, Amy
Notes by: Karl
Agenda
Notes
Github Repo
Report outline, 50 page limit
Our Proposal was arranged by science deliverables; and so is the S4 science book.
Current outline follows working groups, science deliverables might make more sense.
CL: Organizing science around what drives the design. So grouping things slightly differently. Improves flow of science into mission design.
SH: So high frequency channels (galactic science) is one of these drivers.
CL: yes, OK. Make it clear.
CL: Extragalactic science includes some things that are more cosmological than astronomical object. Those could be separate. Minor detail.
CL: Complementarity also needs to be discussed.
SH: Jamie advocated a joint PICO-S4 or space-ground white paper to discuss complementarity.
CL: Attaching such a white paper would be effective for document to decadal.
Decision: Section 3 rearrange to science deliverables. Separate science drivers and non-driving science.
Shaul will rearrange outline, so next week can discuss writing assignments and final those during workshop.
AT: TeamX slides status.
Instrument slides. Gave feedback, TeamX integrating comments.
Today reviewing Mission slides.
After these to rounds will release to EC.
Interesting Figure from Alex Van Engelen, for APS talk.
lensing potential, for EB estimator we seem to have lower noise. EB is the more effective estimator.
Bill: complementarity/competitiveness with S4 don't need to be mutually exclusive.
General discussion: Why does PICO do better? PICO has better E-mode measurement.
SH: Why S4 better at TT, PICO better at EB?
Dan: PICO beam means lose modes > ell 2000-ish. Lensing connects high ell to low, so those modes are valuable.
SH: Other new from science groups.