Campuses:
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Next revision | Previous revision | ||
20070913teleconnotes [2007/09/18 11:31] – created 128.101.214.232 | 20070913teleconnotes [2007/09/18 11:54] (current) – 128.101.214.232 | ||
---|---|---|---|
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
+ | ==== Telecon Notes ==== | ||
- | Topic 1: Review of the BEPAC deliberations and findings by Mark Devlin and Stephan Meyer, | + | September 13, 2007, 3pm EDT |
- | DEVLIN: Competition for top three slots in survey (JDEM, Con-X, LISA) was | + | __Topic 1: Review of the BEPAC deliberations and findings by Mark Devlin and Stephan Meyer,__ |
- | very tough. | + | |
- | communities. LISA had very exciting science compared with other Beyond Einstein (BE) missions. The Inflation Probe was categorized as an experiment. | + | |
- | JDEM, all flavors, returns much more data than that needed to get the single | + | DEVLIN: Competition for top three slots in survey (JDEM, Con-X, LISA) was very tough. |
- | Dark Energy measurement, | + | |
Costs were not that big a discriminator. | Costs were not that big a discriminator. | ||
- | Technology not in place for CMBPol, measurement fantastically difficult to | + | Technology not in place for CMBPol, measurement fantastically difficult to make, raw challenge for sensitivity in the face of unknown systematics and foregrounds. |
- | make, raw challenge for sensitivity, in the face of unknown systematics and | + | |
- | foregrounds. | + | |
- | for the science. | + | |
- | KRAUSS: sounds like "they wanted LISA, but it¹s not ready so we¹ll | + | KRAUSS: sounds like "they wanted LISA, but it' |
- | JDEM" | + | |
DEVLIN: Even if JDEM does not produce any exciting science about dark energy, which is a real possibility, | DEVLIN: Even if JDEM does not produce any exciting science about dark energy, which is a real possibility, | ||
Line 25: | Line 19: | ||
MEYER: Committee focused on the question of BE science. All missions, with some caveats about Con-X, were worthy BE science. So question is where do you start? | MEYER: Committee focused on the question of BE science. All missions, with some caveats about Con-X, were worthy BE science. So question is where do you start? | ||
- | JULIAN: The report said Con-X is not really a BE mission. | + | JULIAN: The report said Con-X is not really a BE mission. |
- | elaborate? | + | |
- | MEYER: There was a preception | + | MEYER: There was a prception |
- | MILLER: Eq. of state not much better (cf. JDEM), or broader than CMBPol. | + | DEVLIN: Con-X does many BE things, but not as well as specific missions like LISA, JDEM. |
- | + | ||
- | DEVLIN: Con-X does many BE things, but not as well as specific missions like | + | |
- | LISA, JDEM. | + | |
MEYER: if w=-1, then you learn nothing more than you know now. However it | MEYER: if w=-1, then you learn nothing more than you know now. However it | ||
Line 42: | Line 32: | ||
HINSHAW: But CIP doesn' | HINSHAW: But CIP doesn' | ||
- | Political factors did not enter the BEPAC report deliberation. | + | DEVLIN/ |
- | there was no consideration of how agencies | + | |
- | HANANY: Clearly the CMB science needs better explanation, | + | HANANY: Clearly the CMB science needs better explanation, |
- | from broader astrophysics and particle physics crowd. Case for ancillary science needs to be made stronger; need to enlist the community that cares about the ancillary science, those doing galactic dust, for example. | + | |
DEVLIN: CMB scientists should give talks to particle physicists, making the Inflation Probe an inevitable mission. Currently this is not the case. Other groups (JDEM, LISA, Con-X) had an air of inevitability to them. | DEVLIN: CMB scientists should give talks to particle physicists, making the Inflation Probe an inevitable mission. Currently this is not the case. Other groups (JDEM, LISA, Con-X) had an air of inevitability to them. | ||
- | Discussion | + | Committee had a discussion |
- | of a mission costs). | + | |
- | alive, you can never new start. | + | |
- | KRAUSS: | + | KRAUSS: |
- | space mission? | + | |
- | MEYER: If this committee (PPPDT) could change the perception of the rest of | + | MEYER: If this committee (PPPDT) could change the perception of the rest of the community about the CMB world that might help the case. A more unified front would be better. |
- | the community about the CMB world that might help the case. A more unified | + | |
- | front would be better. | + | |
Krauss(?): A plus for CMB, is that the theoretical understanding is extremely well developed. | Krauss(?): A plus for CMB, is that the theoretical understanding is extremely well developed. | ||
+ | __TOPIC 2: COMMON CMB proposal__ | ||
+ | Shaul reports that through discussions over the last week the following course of action takes shape: the CMB community will submit an omnibus proposal which is likely to be funded and approved by NASA. The report emerging from this proposal will have the science and foregrounds sections done together. There will be few (one to three) example missions, one or two aligned around current bolometric missions, and perhaps another HEMT mission. The PI will coordinate science and foreground with subgroups working on daughter mission concepts. Julian notes that commonality in data analysis could be factored in as well. | ||
- | TOPIC 2: COMMON CMB proposal | + | Jamie notes that decisions |
- | + | ||
- | What¹s taking shape: omnibus CMB proposal/ | + | |
- | foregrounds sections are done all together. May elect to cost between 1-3 | + | |
- | example missions, 1 HEMT, 1 or 2 aligned around current bolometric missions. | + | |
- | PI will coordinate science and foreground with subgroups working daughter | + | |
- | missions themselves. Commonality in data analysis could be factored | + | |
- | well. | + | |
- | + | ||
- | Don¹t want to make every option equal. Should pick a favorite. | + | |
- | Report | + | People voiced strong sentiment that the report emerging from this omnibus proposal |
- | means that bolometers would be the choice. | + | |
- | Future is likely | + | Is everyone on board for one proposal? |
- | Next step would be in selecting | + | Next steps are to select |
- | Is everyone on board for one proposal? | + | Shaul will compile |
- | a community. | + | |
- | How will a single presentation be made? Ultimately will not want to present | ||
- | a menu to the decadal. | ||
- | Should send email to community that we want to go as a community, advertise | ||
- | the work of the PPPDT to others that they can participate. | ||
- | compile a draft letter, and solicit nominations anyone we know within the | ||
- | CMB community. |