CMBPol Mission Concept Study
Telecon notes
06 February, 2008

Participants:
Bock, Borrill, Cooray, Dodelson, Dunkley, Hanany, Hinshaw, Kogut, Meyer, Page, Shimon, Zaldarriaga

Viewgraphs to be found at http://cmbpol.uchicago.edu
____________________________________________________________
Meyer reports that Eric Smith states that the proposal review schedule is on course for selection in the first part of February.

Brian Keating will carry out a polarization systematics study as part of our proposal.
____________________________________________________________
Workshop Updates:

Theory - (Dodelson) Webpage will be setup with general invitation. Targeted invitations may not be necessary. Dodelson got several inquiries following Hanany talk in Aspen. Organizers will develop detailed workshop outlines to frame discussions.
Dodelson to give CMBPol overview to P5 subcommittee of HEPAP Feb 22.
 
Systematics - (Hinshaw) 3 possible venues, dates set to July 28-30. Organizers will send out open invitation and may need to work to bring in some participants.
 
Technology - (Hanany + Irwin by email) Slightly behind on sending out invitations but currently working on it.
____________________________________________________________
Aspen Summary (Hanany)

Hanany has two viewgraphs posted on the web. Additional points made during the discussion which followed:
* Make distinction between B-Mode science and B-Mode satellite. Our report needs to advocate both but make the distinction.
* We must be very careful about how we advocate orbital vs. sub-orbital research. Page points out that the detector research at NASA centers depends on a future orbital mission advocated now. This is not necessarily program that would come from a pure science outlook. Ultimately, satellite data will give the best possible B-mode result. 
* Null results. Need theory limits to intersect strongly (how many sigma?) with experiment sensitivity for a null to be scientifically interesting. Selling a satellite based on a likely null result will be very difficult.
____________________________________________________________
Lensing Study (Zaldarriaga)

* Building on study of large-scale polarization systematics. Study will extend to high resolution appropriate to lensing. Previous work is analytic and may be extended to a numerical study and include beam parameters. 
* Future satellite - relationship between ground-based and satellite for lensing. How big a region of high resolution data is required for cleaning lensing out of inflation signal measured at lower resolution? Hope to have hard numbers for systematics for lensing and Fischer matrix analysis for ground-based plus satellite combination.

A point which came up in the discussion of the bolometer mission study is the question of working on the science output vs. resolution question for lensing.
____________________________________________________________
Bolometer Mission Study (Bock)

Bock has a viewgraph posted on the web. Main Points and additional discussion:

Low resolution option - studies beyond EPIC. Band optimization, how many low frequency pixels? Larger optics to keep resolution constant with frequency? Consequences of non-ideal waveplate. Waveplate modulation frequency? Mitigate unmatched beams with scan strategy?

High resolution option - Study the (Optics design - mass - cost - science return) space. Team X will look at the costing after the workshops giving as much time as possible to examine these trades.

Borrill adds: There are time-domain on-the-fly simulations being used for Planck, Polarbear and EBEX and these could be used for this study. Also, what is the assumption for data compression.
____________________________________________________________