Re: revision to CMAG paper (1.57)

From: Chris Lidman (clidman@eso.org)
Date: Mon Apr 18 2005 - 11:25:48 PDT

  • Next message: Alexander Conley: "Re: revision to CMAG paper (1.57)"

    Hi Alex,
        Thanks for the new version. I read it and it looks fine. I noticed
    a couple of typos, which I list below.

    p. 3, 2nd paragraph - "which can bias the ? under"

    p.25, 1st paragraph - "is not be the same"

    p.41, Fig. 8 - Four curves a plotted in the figure but only three are
    annotated
    in the bottom right corner of the figure.

    pp. 46-47, CMAG -> CMAGIC in Fig. 12 and 13. "to same" -> "to the same"

    Regards,

    Chris.

    On Apr 13, 2005, at 5:18 PM, Alexander Conley wrote:

    > Following the comments of Saul and Chris, I have
    > issued another version of the CMAGIC paper. Saul
    > convinced me to move large chunks of section 9.2
    > to an appendix. I have also now looked at the ApJ
    > instructions to authors and tried to modify things
    > along those lines. Furthermore, Lifan and Tony
    > had a number of suggestions related to various
    > figures, which have (mostly) been implemented.
    >
    > Available in the usual place as version 1.57 :
    > http://panisse.lbl.gov/~aconley/cmag/
    >
    > I probably won't be able to do anything major
    > on this paper until I am settled in Toronto --
    > say May 1st.
    >
    > Remaining things to do:
    > 1) Author list
    > 2) Get a source for the LSST/DMT supernova search
    > 3) Figure out how to improve figure 3 (schematic of
    > why dust affects CMAGIC less)
    > 4) Maybe add a flat Universe line to the Hubble diagram,
    > although unless something else is removed the plot becomes
    > too confusing. Alternatively, I could do what we always do
    > and make a unreadably thin Hubble residual plot instead.
    >
    > Alex
    >
    >

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Apr 18 2005 - 23:30:39 PDT