2 Jul
2015
2 Jul
'15
8:18 p.m.
the plot of response vs. pol angle for a given
detector looks like a sine
wave of pi periodicity. The troughs are at T and the peaks are at T+P
Is that right? Isn't T the average level and half the amplitude of the
variation is Q?
Seems we will need to settle this is to run a sim with simopt.rndeps turned
on...
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
**********************************************************************
2 Jul
2 Jul
8:30 p.m.
New subject: effects capable of causing T->P
Okay, I agree, that's right, and in fact that's what's in reduc_makesim.
But it doesn't change the picture that, in the case of no intrinsic
polarization, epsilon will not produce a sine wave in A-B under rotation
about the pair center, and therefore there is no T->P. Nor can there be any
changes in the maxima and minima of A-B, and so there is no E->B.
On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 7:18 PM, Clem Pryke <pryke(a)physics.umn.edu> wrote:
--
**********************************************************************
Christopher Sheehy
KICP Fellow, University of Chicago
5640 S Ellis Ave
LASR 122
Chicago, IL 60637
office: (773) 702-9751
**********************************************************************
the plot of
response vs. pol angle for a given detector looks like a sine
wave of pi periodicity. The troughs are at T and the peaks are at T+P
Is that right? Isn't T the average level and half the amplitude of the
variation is Q?
Seems we will need to settle this is to run a sim with simopt.rndeps turned
on...
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
**********************************************************************
3 Jul
3 Jul
4:51 p.m.
New subject: effects capable of causing T->P
Seems we will need to settle this is to run a sim with simopt.rndeps
turned
on...
Well, just looking at reduc_makesim, can't we pretty much guarantee that a
TnoPol sim will have all zero Q and U maps?
1021 q.gamma=(1-q.epsilon)./(1+q.epsilon);
1328 sky=cmap.T + q.gamma(k)*(cmap.Q.*cos(2*alpha*pi/180) + ...
cmap.U.*sin(2*alpha*pi/180));
(The latter is 'linear' interpolation, which is the original function of
gen_sig.) There is just no way to turn epsilon<1 into T->P leakage in
reduc_makesim!
On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 7:18 PM, Clem Pryke <pryke(a)physics.umn.edu> wrote:
the plot of
response vs. pol angle for a given detector looks like a sine
wave of pi periodicity. The troughs are at T and the peaks are at T+P
Is that right? Isn't T the average level and half the amplitude of the
variation is Q?
Seems we will need to settle this is to run a sim with simopt.rndeps turned
on...
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
**********************************************************************
3242
days inactive
3242
days old
bicep2-list@lists.fas.harvard.edu
2 comments
2 participants
participants (2)
-
Chris Sheehy -
Clem Pryke