1. The CMB and Gravity Waves John Ruhl Case Western Reserve University 3/17/2006, CERCA at St. Thomas

2. WMAP 3yr temperature maps… what the sky really looks like. (What the sky really looks like) 23 GHz 33 GHz 41 GHz 61 GHz 94 GHz

3. WMAP 3-year map, “galaxy subtracted”

4. Boomerang “T” maps B03: 150GHz (published) 10’ resolution, ~1000 sq. deg.

5. Acbar maps 150GHz, 5’ resolution, 10’s of sq. deg, More coming soon.

6. Power spectra =>  CDM looks good Power Spectrum (uK 2 ) Legendre l

7. B03 power spectrum =>  CDM still looks good

8. WMAP(3yr)+others Figure 18, Hinshaw etal, WMAP 3-year release

9. WMAP 3yr data… theory-scaled to high-ell… Fig 5, Spergel etal, WMAP 3-year release

10. “Post B03” (pre-WMAP3) parameters MacTavish etal, B03 release

11. Still of interest r = T/S: primordial gravity waves (tensor modes) n T : spectral index of tensor mode power spectrum n s : spectral index of density perturbation power spectrum, Dark Energy w, w’, etc non-gaussianity Isocurvature modes Suprises: eg “not flat”, obs. disagreements, etc.

12. n s vs r : current limits Plot from M. Tegmark, TFCR report r  T/S n s CMB “goal” WMAP 3yr, r<0.28 (95%CL) w/SDSS

13. CMB polarization Two causes: 1.“Normal”  CDM: Density perturbations at z=1000 lead to velocities that create local quadrupoles seen by scattering electrons. => “E-mode polarization” (no curl) 2.Gravity waves: create local quadrupoles seen by scattering electrons, => “B-mode polarization” (curl)

14. Both are caused by the polarization dependence in Thomson scattering

15. Anisotropic illumination => polarization Green = probability of emitting in that direction… Observer Vertical pol. No emission to observer Horizontal pol. (in and out of page) Line of sight

16. Gravity Wave Surface of last scattering Gravity waves at z=1000

17. … create local quadrupoles around an electron at z=1000.

18. Flavors of CMB polarization Two patterns: Density perturbations: curl-free, “E-mode” Gravity waves: curl, “B-mode”

19. IAU convention for Q and U North East + - Q North East U + - Each point on the sphere has a Q or U value determined by the polarization at that point. Linear polarization Stokes parameters

20. Stokes Parameters vs. E and B mode The E-mode (or B-mode) value at a point on the sphere depends on the polarization pattern all around it. Direction you’re looking on the sky (2 components) Same thing, but variable for integration Polar coordinates of relative to Weighting function (Note: w=0 for theta =0)

21. E and B mode patterns Blue = + Red = - “local” Q“local” U For a given circle ( ), circumference goes as, while, so the contribution of that circle goes as 1/.

22. E and B mode patterns Unchanged under parity flip Sign reverses under parity flip E-mode B-mode Seljak and Zaldarriaga, astro-ph/9805010

23. E-mode polarization (simulation) Seljak and Zaldarriaga, astro-ph/9805010 Color: |E| Bars: E-mode polarization direction and size

24. B-mode polarization (simulation) Seljak and Zaldarriaga, astro-ph/9805010 Color: |B| Bars: B-mode polarization direction and size

25. TE-mode polarization (simulation) Seljak and Zaldarriaga, astro-ph/9805010 Color: T Bars: Rotated 45deg to turn E into B.

26. TE-mode polarization (correlated only) Seljak and Zaldarriaga, astro-ph/9805010 Color: E-field Bars: E pol

27. CMB Polarization power spectra Primordial B-modes Reionization bump Shape and amplitude of EE are predicted by  CDM. ``Shape” of BB is predicted “scale- invariand GW’s”. Amplitude of BB is model dependent.

28. The State of CMB polarization measurements

29. WMAP, Kogut etal Fig 22, Hinshaw etal, WMAP 3yr release

30. EE power spectrum data

31. Figure 22, Page etal, WMAP 3-yr release.

32. B03 and WMAP 3yr

33. High-l BB power spectrum data

34. CMB Polarization power spectra Current “high-l” BB limits

35. WMAP Polarization data BB limit (1sigma) r=0.3 BB Foreground model Figure 25, Page etal, WMAP 3yr release Current “high-l” BB limits

36. Measurements to date

37. Reionization

38. The Future of CMB polarization measurements Foregrounds Technology

39. Foregrounds at l=50 S. Golwala, 2005 r = 0.01 Dust Synchrotron

40. Galactic Foregrounds: l-space From G. Hinshaw, TFCR report

41. “Future, large angular scale” CMB Polarization Experiments deployed funded proposed Quad: NTD bolo, 90/150 GHz, ~0.2deg, ~100 elements. Spole. Bicep: NTD bolo, 90/150 GHz, ~1deg, ~100 elements, Spole Ebex: SC Bolos, 90-400GHz, ~0.2deg, ~1000 elements, balloon Pappa: SC bolos, 90/150GHz, ~1deg, ~20 elements, balloon Clover: SC bolos?, 90-220GHz?, ~1deg, ~1000 elements, Chile Quiet: Hemts, ??? freqs/elements, Chile Polarbear: SC bolos, 90/150/220GHz, ~0.2deg, ~? Elements, Chile Spider: SC bolos, 40-220GHz, ~1deg, ~1000 elements, balloon CMBPOL: ???, satellite [see TFCR (aka “Weiss”) report]

42. Sensitivities 1 10 100 1000 Plot from T. Montroy

43. Predicted Future Experiment Sensitivities From G. Hinshaw, TFCR report

44. Systematics to conquer Table 6.1 from TFCR report

45. Experiment strengths and weaknesses

47. On-chip modulator (continuous) Detectorfeed(s)Other optics “on chip” modulatorphotons

48. On-chip modulator (two state)

50. “After primary” modulator (continuous) Detectormodulator feed(s)Other optics “on chip” photons

51. “Ideal” Future experiment to probe Inflation Lots of sensitive detectors and integration time “Good enough” angular resolution (to measure l=100 bump) “Large enough” sky coverage (to measure reionization bump) Low systematics, polarization modulator… optimized for Polarization. Ultimate instrument: CMBPOL satellite Realistic (proposed) instrument…

52. Spider (CMBPOL on a rope) Canada: U. Toronto, U.BC UK: Cardiff, Imperial Coll. London USA: Caltech, Case, JPL, NIST A balloone-borne “low l” machine

53. Six frequency bands Six telescopes Clean refractor optics Halfwave plates

54. CIT/JPL Polarized Array 8x8=64 pixel phased-array “patches”, 2 polarizations on each.

55. JPL Antenna-coupled bolometer, and crossed dipole elements

56. Around the world flight from Australia, night time observing only Large sky coverage => get to low l

57. Half wave plate polarization Modulator High index Low index 6” diameter birefringent sapphire plate Challenges: AR coating “well enough”, cryogenic “fast” rotation

58. Half wave plate polarization Modulator Linear polarization sent through plate to aligned linearly polarized detector Plate rotation angle (about 1 rotation) Signal R R B B 45

59. Spider baseline bands and sensitivities 1856 detectors 6 bands

60. Sensitivities Plot from T. Montroy

61. Benefit of measuring the Reionization bump Plot from C.L. Kuo (1 year) WMAP 3-year EE: tau = 0.10 +- 0.03 WMAP 3-year all: tau = 0.09 +- 0.03

62. Summary 1.CMB polarization may contain “fingerprints” of gravity waves at z=1000 and z=30ish, 2. The technology for such measurements is rapidly being brought to the field, and prospects look very good.

63. THE END

64. Epsilon vs. a From the NASA/NSF/DOE Task force on CMB research report, 2005

65. Epsilon vs. a From the NASA/NSF/DOE Task force on CMB research report, 2005

66. Reheating Remember: kinetic term exponential expansion. As inflation “starts to end”:

67. GW Omega(f)

68. Hi gang, ﾊﾊﾊﾊﾊﾊﾊ vis-a-vis our discussion this morning, here are approximate specs on several experiments that are in operation or being built that will search for B-modes at ell ~ 30 -> 100. ﾊﾊﾊﾊﾊﾊﾊ Of these, the performance estimates for BICEP (Hivon) are the most dated, followed by EBEX (? Bacigallupi?) and then QUIET (?Gorski?), which are the most recent. ﾊ The QUIET site goes into some detail about what effects have and have not been included in their performance estimates. ﾊﾊﾊﾊﾊﾊﾊ I hope to talk to Gorski today to find out what may or may not have been already done for Planck and QUIET.aBICEP20 x 40 degrees at 1 degree resolutionQUIET:20 x 20 degrees at 14 arcmin4 x 4 degrees at 3.5 arcminhttp://quiet.uchicago.edu/index.phpEBEX:20 x 30 degrees at 8 arcminhttp://groups.physics.umn.edu/cosmology/ebex/index.htmlhttp://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0501111--