From: Ariel Goobar (ariel@physto.se)
Date: Mon May 13 2002 - 00:35:17 PDT
Dear Chris et al,
reading Andy's mail it sounds like T02-037 is the better choice for
ISAAC follow-up. With a rest-frame epoch of -7 it should be about
22.85 in J and become almost ~0.2 mag brighter within the coming week.
Rob: can the dating be confirmed with the TNG data points?
Ariel
On Mon, 13 May 2002 DAHowell@lbl.gov wrote:
> Actually, I would guess that S02-064 is past maximum. It may even be a
> Ib/c -- it looks a lot like SN 1994 I at +11d at z=0.33. I interpret
> the comments in SN Trak to mean that there is light in the reference,
> so that is a possibility. I have added many postmax templates to my
> program to check this and it is running now.
>
> I agree with Isobel that T02-037 is a Ia at z=0.49. My program gives a
> best fit to SN 1990N at -7d at that redshift.
>
> C02-027 doesn't look like much of anything. I don't see any obvious SN
> signal in the infamous LINER spectrum of C02-031 either.
>
> -Andy
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Isobel Hook <ihook@gemini.edu>
> Date: Sunday, May 12, 2002 4:18 am
> Subject: S02-064
>
> >
> > Hi,
> > I've looked at the Gemini data on S02-064 again too. See
> > http://ftp.gemini.edu/staff/ihook/SN/
> > S02_064.*
> >
> > The best match (by eye) that I could get from the templates I have
> > is 90N
> > at -14 days. Perhaps someone else could have a look at this since
> > we may
> > have caught it nice and early.
> >
> > Isobel.
> >
> >
> >
>
-- ___________________________________________________________________ Ariel Goobar (ariel@physto.se) FYSIKUM, Stockholm University Stockholm Center for Physics, Astronomy & Biotechnology tel: +46 8 55378659
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon May 13 2002 - 00:35:37 PDT