Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revision |
| 20080403teleconnotes [2008/04/09 17:03] – 128.101.214.113 | 20080403teleconnotes [2008/04/09 21:17] (current) – 71.195.59.133 |
|---|
| A discussion of Jamie's formulation of the strategy where we propose the entire slew of science that can be done with CMBPol and let future developments adjust specific future designs. | A discussion of Jamie's formulation of the strategy where we propose the entire slew of science that can be done with CMBPol and let future developments adjust specific future designs. |
| |
| The problem is that the cost of such a mission might be prohibitive, perhaps $2B. Only LISA | The problem is that the cost of such a mission might be prohibitive, perhaps $2B. Only LISA's cost estimates are near that level and there is a broad perception that science return from LISA is on a class of its own. The key question then becomes whether a ~$1B satellite can be designed with a resolution of ~10' and is that resolution sufficient to give most of the small scale science. A related question is whether astrophysicists who are interested in galactic dust and magnetic fields would sign on to a mission with such a resolution. |
| | |
| | How to proceed: Shaul will draft a statement in regard to a satellite strategy that will be debated by the PPPDT. The goal is to arrive at a consensus behind which we can unite large segments of the community. Shaul will circulate before the telecon next week. |
| |