3 ms·
Direct detection would be a lot more informative. It's also hard. There are a lot of systematic effects (foregrounds, etc.) that can matter to CMB measurements
by ISL 11y ago
Direct detection would be a lot more informative. It's also hard.
There are a lot of systematic effects (foregrounds, etc.) that can matter to CMB measurements.
Any indirect glimpse is still quite valuable, as deviations from the standard plan might be apparent. Any measurement of the neutrino temperature at decoupling is interesting.
(Edit: I'd also note that the last great prediction of the Big Bang is 'inflation', something about which we know next to nothing.)
- jessriedel 11y agoOK, so indirect gets us neutrino temperature at decoupling, and direct gets us current neutrino temperature and (I guess) feeds into neutrino mass measurements and the PMNS matrix. Anything else?
- xlm1717 11y agoIf we could get a "picture" of the CNB in all directions, it could give us hints to the structure of the Universe at two seconds after the big bang, just as the CMB gives us hints to the structure of the universe at 379,000 years after the big bang.
- ISL 11y agoAny new handle on the number of neutrino-like species is interesting to dark matter searches... If you could actually image the CNB, the implications would be comparable to the CNB. Even just a measurement of the magnitude of the dipole would be compelling.