Is Planck Dust Modeling Consistent with BICEP2 Assumptions?

[Chronos]

Planck dust modeling has been released [re: http://arxiv.org/abs/1409.2495] . It appears to be consistent with the assumptions of BICEP2, but, that is an unsupported assumption. I expected an immediate reaction from the BICEP2 team, or other interested parties. Perhaps I am merely impatient, or the results are inconclusive.

 

[Garth]

Thank you Chronos for that link.

However, what is important for the BICEP2 result is to plot the magnetic contents of dust lanes - i.e. iron grains - that if aligned by galactic magnetic fields could emulate the B Mode polarisation of the CMB. Fingerprints of Galactic Loop I on the Cosmic Microwave Background

Following the DL model

Li & Draine (2001) developed a carbonaceous-silicate grain model that has been quite successful in reproducing observed interstellar extinction, scattering, and IR emission. DL presented an updated physical dust model, extensively used to model starlight absorption and IR emission. The DL dust model employs a mixture of amorphous silicate grains and carbonaceous grains.

the authors would not seem to be looking at the relevant type of dust crucial to verify or otherwise the BICEP2 result.

Garth

 

[CKH]

Earth's atmosphere polarizes light fairly strongly. I'm not sure if this is caused by dust and in particular, by magnetic materials in the dust.