WMAP5
-
- Posts: 129
- Joined: September 24 2004
- Affiliation: University of Rome
- Contact:
WMAP5
Should be out "soon" !
-
- Posts: 60
- Joined: September 25 2004
- Affiliation: ITA, University of Oslo
- Contact:
Re: WMAP5
Pff..! What sort of a comment is that?! First of all, "soon" can mean anything. Second, references are, as always, greatly appreciated! :-)Alessandro Melchiorri wrote:Should be out "soon" !
-
- Posts: 129
- Joined: September 24 2004
- Affiliation: University of Rome
- Contact:
WMAP5
ehm... the reference comes from a recent talk by Lyman Page.
Concerning the 'soon'....it seems that they are writing up the
main papers, so perhaps end of the year ?
cheers
Ale
Concerning the 'soon'....it seems that they are writing up the
main papers, so perhaps end of the year ?
cheers
Ale
-
- Posts: 129
- Joined: September 24 2004
- Affiliation: University of Rome
- Contact:
WMAP5
Hi, I just heard that it should be out this week...anyone can confirm ?
ciao
Alessandro
ciao
Alessandro
WMAP5
A birdie told me this week... but we've heard that before!
-
- Posts: 8
- Joined: August 17 2006
- Affiliation: University of Sussex
- Contact:
WMAP5
More to the point - do you expect anything important to change significantly?
-
- Posts: 129
- Joined: September 24 2004
- Affiliation: University of Rome
- Contact:
WMAP5
I guess they will have better polarization results. sigma_8 may change a bit.
tau and n_s too...
Most interesting thing will be non gaussianity and the possible confirmation of the several anomalies...
ciao
Ale
tau and n_s too...
Most interesting thing will be non gaussianity and the possible confirmation of the several anomalies...
ciao
Ale
-
- Posts: 1983
- Joined: September 23 2004
- Affiliation: University of Sussex
- Contact:
-
- Posts: 1
- Joined: March 06 2008
- Affiliation: JPL / Caltech
WMAP5
Just plotted the 5 year power spectrum versus 3 year. Difference looks bigger than I expected.
-
- Posts: 144
- Joined: September 24 2004
- Affiliation: University College London (UCL)
- Contact:
WMAP5
Interesting, thanks! Looks like some change in some calibration(s)?
-
- Posts: 129
- Joined: September 24 2004
- Affiliation: University of Rome
- Contact:
WMAP5
Thanks! very interesting...I would say beam calibration perhaps ?
I wonder how TE compares...
I wonder how TE compares...
-
- Posts: 60
- Joined: September 25 2004
- Affiliation: ITA, University of Oslo
- Contact:
WMAP5
Yes, it's the revised beams. *Huge* difference -- much larger than anybody expected, given their original claims in the 3-yr release, I think. Essentially, from what I've seen so far, WMAP5 seems like a pretty nice bug fix, but not really a whole lot more.. :-)
-
- Posts: 49
- Joined: December 17 2004
- Affiliation: Perimeter Institute/ University of Waterloo
- Contact:
WMAP5
FYI, we had two back to back workshops on early universe and non-gaussianity at PI. Most of talks are now available online. In particular Eiichiro gave two talks on WMAP5 results, that you can watch at: http://www.perimeterinstitute.ca/News/In_The_Media/wmap_results/
You can watch rest of the talks (mostly related to primordial non-gaussianity) through http://pirsa.org/
You can watch rest of the talks (mostly related to primordial non-gaussianity) through http://pirsa.org/
-
- Posts: 11
- Joined: September 28 2004
- Affiliation: University of Warwick
- Contact:
WMAP5
Might be worth taking a moment to remember the sorts of error bars we were used to looking at six or seven years ago. Pretty remarkable progress!