Thanks Walt!
That does indeed seem to be conclusive.
Clem
--
**********************************************************************
Clem Pryke - Associate Professor - Physics
University of Minnesota,
Room 313 Tate, 116 Church Street S.E. Minneapolis, MN, 55455
Tel: 612-624-7578 Fax: 612-624-4578 email: pryke(a)physics.umn.edu
**********************************************************************
Hi all,
I've posted a note on the satcom mirror test:
http://bicep0.caltech.edu/~spuder/keck_analysis_logbook/analysis/20131031_s…
The ground-fixed signal goes away in the receivers that are blanked
off. I have confirmed that the TESs are still on transition (with one
possible exception). I conclude that the 2 GHz from the GOES
transmitter is coming in through the window, not the electronics
feedthroughs.
- Walt
Hi all,
We will have our BICEP2 / Keck CMB analysis telecon tomorrow at the
usual time:
Tues, 20 Aug 2013 - 12:00 Eastern, 11:00 Central, 9:00 am Pacific
1-866-890-3820 (toll: 1-334-323-7229) Passcode: 59702175#
Starting this week, we will begin promptly after the hour and cap the
telecon at 2:30 max.
Please send an email when you put up any posting giving a brief summary
and noting if it needs to be discussed on the telecon.
New postings must be up by 7am eastern to be discussed this week.
Here's tomorrow's agenda in brief:
1) Papers
- Paper I: Instrument paper, updates since last week? [ Walt ]
- Paper II: Beams paper, detailed status report [ Abby ]
http://bmode.caltech.edu/~bicep2/papers/2013_beams/
- timeline on assigned tasks, status of unassigned tasks
2) Computing and simsets
- odyssey / general computing report: [ Walt ]
- odyssey changes
- panlfs usage
- sim 1450 progress report [ Stefan ]
- timelines to: reduc_final pager, 50 rlz
3) Postings [ Clem out so John to lead this week... ]
4) Other initial-result-critical analysis tasks [ John to lead ]
- What tasks need effort? Can we assign it?
- “steady” crosstalk -- quantify from beammaps and then sim
- “variable” crosstalk -- what’s the path to constraining?
- sidelobe sim / spherical convolution implementation [ Sergi ]
- composite sidelobe maps
- B1 x B2
Full agenda is in the telecon notes here http://goo.gl/LNvpx
Add any more items you want discussed there before the telecon.
John
Hi Sarah,
In your post it says:
> type8=type7+0.2*type4
That's not right is it - the power spectrum scales with r but the map scales
as sqrt(r) - so for r=0.02 you want type7+0.4472*type4 don't you?
Clem
--
**********************************************************************
Clem Pryke - Associate Professor - Physics
University of Minnesota,
Room 313 Tate, 116 Church Street S.E. Minneapolis, MN, 55455
Tel: 612-624-7578 Fax: 612-624-4578 email: pryke(a)physics.umn.edu
**********************************************************************
Hi everyone,
I have a posting with some thoughts about what it means to fail the
spectral jack:
http://bicep0.caltech.edu/~spuder/analysis_logbook/analysis/20131016_spectr…
I find that adding BB power in the signal+noise sims somewhat reduces
the significance of the BICEP2/Keck and BICEP2/rx1 spectral jack
failures. In order to increase the error bars enough to formally pass
the jack, the BB power would have to be much larger than r=0.1.
We should also think about whether there are known systematics that can
cause a failure of this jack, and in particular whether there are
systematics that can cause the spectral jack to fail without
necessarily implying that the bottom line for r is untrustworthy.
- Walt
