Re: Satie

From: Greg Aldering (aldering@panisse.lbl.gov)
Date: Sat Apr 20 2002 - 14:54:41 PDT

  • Next message: clidman: "Re: 169.A-0382(G) - completed"

    Hi Isobel,

    Yes, Satie was covered by the CTIO search last year; it has no CFHT
    coverage. From the discovery information we can't rule out light in
    last year's reference. Only if Rob has a lightcurve which shows there
    isn't light in the ref will be able to deduce anything about the host
    brightness from last year's CTIO data.

    The lack of deep data from the last CTIO run means we won't know more
    about Satie's host until the CTIO run in May unless we obtain
    additional imaging data elsewhere. As we discussed last week, the
    additional imaging option is not very efficient (and I don't think we
    requested final references for Satie at VLT since it was an HST SN).

    Based on Rachel's examination of the HST images we know that Satie's
    host is not very extended. The HDFs suggest that 90% of objects with
    FWHM < 0.3 arcsec will have I-magnitude less than about 27. (Since we
    have a redshift we can probably use the size constraint to calculate a
    better contraint using an upper limit galaxy surface brightness). In
    this case we will never actually detect Satie's host in J-band unless
    it is very red. Therefore, I think there is a good possibility that
    deep optical groundbase (CTIO) or HST images of Satie's host, coupled
    with limits on host galaxy colors (e.g. restframe U-V < 1.2), might
    produce a better upper limit on the host brightness in J than will 10-14
    hours of imaging with NIRI/ISSAC.

    - Greg



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 14:58:59 PDT