| | |
| | |
Stat |
Members: 3665 Articles: 2'599'751 Articles rated: 2609
17 January 2025 |
|
| | | |
|
Article overview
| |
|
The impact of dipole straylight contamination on the alignment of low multipoles of CMB anisotropies | A.Gruppuso
; C.Burigana
; F.Finelli
; | Date: |
10 Jan 2007 | Abstract: | We estimate the impact of the Dipole Straylight Contamination (DSC) for the {it Planck} satellite on the alignments of vectors associated to the low multipoles of the pattern of the cosmic microwave background (CMB) anisotropies. In particular we study how the probability distributions of eighteen estimators for the alignments change when DSC is taken into account. We find that possible residual DSC should leave a non-negligible impact on low multipole alignments for effective values of the fractional far sidelobe integrated response, $p$, larger than $sim {
m few} imes 10^{-3}$. The effect is strongly dependent on the intrinsic sky amplitude and weakly dependent on the considered scanning strategy. We find a decrease of the alignment probability between the quadrupole and the dipole and an increase of the alignment probability between the hexadecapole and the dipole (larger is the intrinsic sky amplitude and lower is the contamination). The remaining estimators do not exhibit clear signatures, except, in some cases, considering the largest values of $p$ and the lowest sky amplitudes. Provided that the real sidelobes of the {it Planck} receivers in flight conditions will correspond to $p lsim {
m few} imes 10^{-3}$, as realistically expected at least in the cosmological frequency channels, and will be known with accuracies better than $sim {
m few} imes 10$% allowing for a suitable cleaning during data reduction, {it Planck} will be very weakly affected from DSC on the alignments of low multipoles. | Source: | arXiv, astro-ph/0701295 | Services: | Forum | Review | PDF | Favorites |
|
|
No review found.
Did you like this article?
Note: answers to reviews or questions about the article must be posted in the forum section.
Authors are not allowed to review their own article. They can use the forum section.
|
| |
|
|
|