The BICEP experiment's recent announcement included the preprint of their paper,

BICEP2 I: Detection of $B$-mode polarization at degree angular scales. BICEP2 Collaboration. To be submitted. BICEP-Keck preprint, arXiv:1403.3985.

Gravitational lensing of the CMB’s light by large scale structure at relatively late times produces small deflections of the primordial pattern, converting a small portion of E-mode power into B-modes. The lensing B-mode spectrum is similar to a smoothed version of the E-mode spectrum but a factor 100 lower in power, and hence also rises toward sub-degree scales and peaks around $\ell$ = 1000.

I think the $\ell$ is this:

For example $\ell=10$ corresponds to roughly 10 degrees on the sky, $\ell=100$ corresponds to roughly 1 degree on the sky. (From CMB introduction, by Wayne Hu.)

But how does that apply here? When BICEP looks for something with an $\ell$ around 80, does that mean a "multipole moment" which spans 80 degrees across the sky?

  • $\begingroup$ The local peak from the primordial gravitational waves is normally expected around $\ell=90$. The spherical harmonic $Y_{90,90}$, for example, has the $J_z$ aligned "maximally vertically, so it is spinning maximally vertically among the $Y_{90,m}$ harmonics, and on this one, you see that the angular dependence contains $\exp(90 i\phi)$ which contains 90 maxima around the circle. So the "wavelength" of the component spans 360/90=4 degrees on the sky. The resolution has to be a bit better to actually "see" the shape of these waves. $\endgroup$ Mar 19, 2014 at 6:05

2 Answers 2


It's the same $\ell$ that indexes the spherical harmonics $Y_{\ell m}$ (or $Y_\ell^m$ if you prefer). We can decompose functions defined on the sphere (like anything defined on the sky) into a countably infinite sum of appropriately weighted spherical harmonics. $\ell$ counts the number of nodes, while different values of $m$, $0 \leq \lvert m \rvert \leq \ell$, give different arrangements of those nodes.

Higher values of $\ell$ correspond to components that have more nodes and fluctuations. The angular scale of variations corresponding to a given $\ell$ scale like $1/\ell$. For more information, you might want to look at an answer I wrote to Relation between multipole moment and angular scale of CMB.

One thing cosmologists do is plot correlations between different quantities as a function of $\ell$. You can imagine decomposing two functions \begin{align} f(\theta, \phi) & = \sum_{\ell=0}^\infty \sum_{m=-\ell}^\ell a_{\ell m} Y_{\ell m}(\theta, \phi) \\ g(\theta, \phi) & = \sum_{\ell=0}^\infty \sum_{m=-\ell}^\ell b_{\ell m} Y_{\ell m}(\theta, \phi), \end{align} where the $a$'s and $b$'s are complex numbers. Then you might plot quantities like $$ Q_\ell = \sum_{m=-\ell}^\ell a_{\ell m}^* b_{\ell m} $$ over a run of $\ell$ for which you have good data, comparing theory to observation. $Q_{80}$, for example, will be built from information about ${\sim}16^\circ$ scales.

BICEP doesn't look at the whole sky, by the way, so they can't even measure the low-$\ell$ components of anything. What they focus on is the high-$\ell$ stuff that might be harder to get with a space-based mission designed to scan the whole sky at lower resolution. The assumption is that the high-$\ell$ signal you get in one part of the sky is representative of the high-$\ell$ signal everywhere. (If this weren't the case we'd live in a very weird universe indeed.)

  • $\begingroup$ There are about 41,000 "square degrees" over the full sky. If the 2 degree region is a circle with a 2 degree diameter, then that would be about 3.14 square degrees. I can't figure out any meaningful connection to 80 here. Maybe 80^2? $\endgroup$ Mar 19, 2014 at 18:44
  • $\begingroup$ Oops - I was using formulas from my other answer, one of which was wrong, the other of which was misleading. $\endgroup$
    – user10851
    Mar 19, 2014 at 19:04

Here are some BICEP2 details to augment Chris White's answer:

BICEP2 accomplishes the task of measuring angular variations in polarization by converting those angular variations to a time domain signal. It does so by scanning its telescope across the sky at a constant rate.

Specifically, the telescope scans at a fixed rate of $2.8^\circ $/ second in azimuth (angle along the horizon), at constant declination. Because the telescope is aiming high in the sky (at its south pole location, average elevation = - average declination = $57.5^\circ$), the actual sky scan rate is approximately $2.8 * \cos(57.5^\circ) = 1.5^\circ /s$.

Therefore, a feature with angular size $\Delta \theta$ appears in the instrument data stream as a signal with time duration $\Delta t = \Delta \theta / 1.5$.

Since the $l$th multipole has $l$ nodes in $180^\circ$, the angular size of a "period" of this multipole (comprising two nodes) is approximately $180^\circ/(l/2) = (360/l)^\circ$, appearing in the data stream as a signal with period $T = (360/1.5)/l = 240/l$, or a frequency $$f=1/T=(l/240) \, \, Hz$$

Thus, the target multipole range $l=20-240$ appear in the data as signal frequencies of approximately $0.083-1 \, Hz$, or time periods ranging from 12 to 1 seconds.

The telescope performs many scans, at varying declinations, with the data being combined to form the final polarization map. Each individual scan takes data over $56.4^\circ$ in azimuth, or approximately $30^\circ$ in the sky. An individual scan therefore takes $56.4/2.8= 20$ seconds, less than 2 periods worth of signal at $l=20$. Thus the scan size limits low-$l$ data collection.

References are the BICEP2 results (especially section III A) and experiment (section 12.2) papers.


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.