Go to the U of M home page
School of Physics & Astronomy
PPPDT Wiki

User Tools


20070913teleconnotes

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Next revision
Previous revision
20070913teleconnotes [2007/09/18 11:31] – created 128.101.214.23220070913teleconnotes [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 132007, 3pm EDT
  
-DEVLINCompetition for top three slots in survey (JDEMCon-X, LISA) was +__Topic 1Review of the BEPAC deliberations and findings by Mark Devlin and Stephan Meyer,__ 
-very tough.  Two missions have broad appeal (Con-X, LISA ) and they serve larger +
-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.  Two missions have broad appeal (Con-X, LISA ) and they serve larger communities. LISA had very exciting science compared with other Beyond Einstein (BE) missions. JDEM, all flavors, returns much more data than that needed to get the single Dark Energy measurement, also had very little technology development needed.
-Dark Energy measurement, also had very little technology development needed.+
  
 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.  Potential of a null result. Interest level not high in general for the science. The Inflation Probe was categorized as an 'experiment'.
-make, raw challenge for sensitivityin the face of unknown systematics and +
-foregrounds.  Potential of a null result. Interest level not high in general +
-for the science.+
  
-KRAUSS: sounds like "they wanted LISA, but it¹s not ready so we¹ll take +KRAUSS: sounds like "they wanted LISA, but it'not ready so we'll take JDEM".  
-JDEM".  +
  
 DEVLIN: Even if JDEM does not produce any exciting science about dark energy, which is a real possibility, one gets 3000 Hubble Deep Fields.  DEVLIN: Even if JDEM does not produce any exciting science about dark energy, which is a real possibility, one gets 3000 Hubble Deep Fields. 
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?  LISA's goals are very hard to match in fitting the BE science goals, but it is not the place to start, given the technical challenges.  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?  LISA's goals are very hard to match in fitting the BE science goals, but it is not the place to start, given the technical challenges. 
  
-JULIAN: The report said Con-X is not really a BE mission.  Could someone +JULIAN: The report said Con-X is not really a BE mission.  Could someone elaborate?
-elaborate?+
  
-MEYER: There was a preception that Con-X was shoe-horned into BE. It is really too broad. It¹s primary strength is not the BE central themes.+MEYER: There was a prception that Con-X was shoe-horned into BE. It is really too broad. It¹s primary strength is not the BE central themes.
  
-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't get the energy scale of inflation. HINSHAW: But CIP doesn't get the energy scale of inflation.
  
-Political factors did not enter the BEPAC report deliberation.  That is, +DEVLIN/MEYER: Political factors did not enter the BEPAC report deliberation.  That is, there was no consideration of how US DOE/NASA/NSF interact, how ESA may move, etc.
-there was no consideration of how agencies interact, how ESA may move, etc.+
  
-HANANY: Clearly the CMB science needs better explanation, more support +HANANY: Clearly the CMB science needs better explanation, more support from broader astrophysics and particle physics crowd. Case for ancillary science needs to be made stronger; need to enlist the community that cares about galactic dust, for example. 
-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 of how much needs to be invested to keep a mission alive (5-10% +Committee had a discussion of how much needs to be invested to keep a mission alive (5-10% of a mission costs).  If however, you spend enough to keep all 5 BE missions alive, you can never new start.
-of a mission costs).  If however, you spend enough to keep all 5 BE missions +
-alive, you can never new start.+
  
-KRAUSS:  Would ground based CMB results move up the time scales for the CMB +KRAUSS:  Would ground based CMB results move up the time scales for the CMB space mission?
-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 will need to be made in the future regarding the relative ranking of the different mission concepts
- +
-What¹s taking shape: omnibus CMB proposal/report  where the science case and +
-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 in as +
-well. +
- +
-Don¹t want to make every option equal. Should pick a favorite.+
  
-Report should build upon Weiss committee, mission in the next 1-3 years +People voiced strong sentiment that the report emerging from this omnibus proposal should build upon and amplify the Weiss committee reportwhich concluded that a mission in the near future means that bolometers would be the choice. 
-means that bolometers would be the choice.+
  
-Future is likely to mean only one satellite with only one technology.+Is everyone on board for one proposal?  One report will be more coherent, as a community.  YES would seem to be the answer.
  
-Next step would be in selecting a PI for proposal.+Next steps are to select a PI for the proposal. S/he will coordinate the proposal and the report. Also, to inform the broader CMB community and to solicit inputs and suggestions
  
-Is everyone on board for one proposal?  One report will be more coherent, as +Shaul will compile draft letter to the community. The letter will advertise the work of the PPPDT, will inform of the plan for an omnibus proposal, and will solicit input
-a community.  YES would seem to be the answer.+
  
-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.  Shaul will 
-compile a draft letter, and solicit nominations ­ anyone we know within the 
-CMB community. 
20070913teleconnotes.1190133105.txt.gz · Last modified: 2007/09/18 11:31 by 128.101.214.232