I've added the ref comments to the shared BK docs folder. I've organized
such that, roughly, each separate paragraph in which I've bolded a phrase
(the summary of the main gripe) requires a reponse.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1UTp_gMnZMOVdlJGzu9-oYiCXZJe1FBxh2U_cXY4…
On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 6:17 PM, Clem Pryke <pryke(a)physics.umn.edu> wrote:
I think that plot is evidence that we got the beam
correction right to high
accuracy out to high ell.
In principle this plot is <1 if there is
incorrect noise debias, but TT
is so bright it might not actually be that sensitive.
The noise in TT is not much worse than the noise in EE&BB - it's absolutely
tiny compared to the signal. If we got the noise debias wrong by factor 10
then this test against Planck would likely still pass.
However the ref's concerns are misplaced - we may unfashionably stick to
using
auto spectra but noise de-bias misestimation is demonstrably not a major
problem.
Clem
--
**********************************************************************
Clem Pryke - Associate Professor - Physics
University of Minnesota
Room 318 Physics and Nanotechnology Building
115 Union Street SE, Minneapolis MN 55455
Tel: 612-624-7578 Fax: 612-624-4578 email: pryke(a)physics.umn.edu
**********************************************************************
--
**********************************************************************
Christopher Sheehy
KICP Fellow, University of Chicago
5640 S Ellis Ave
LASR 122
Chicago, IL 60637
office: (773) 702-9751
**********************************************************************