From: Alexander Conley (ajconley@lbl.gov)
Date: Wed Apr 27 2005 - 13:52:36 PDT
Hi Chris,
Thanks for noticing those. New version available, etc., etc. (1.59)
With any luck I didn't introduce new typos in the process.
Alex
On Apr 18, 2005, at 2:25 PM, Chris Lidman wrote:
> 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 : Wed Apr 27 2005 - 13:50:36 PDT