From: Saul Perlmutter (saul@lbl.gov)
Date: Thu May 16 2002 - 13:57:40 PDT
Hello Chris and Everybody,
I'm on my way to the airport, and just checking my email for five minutes before I have to head off to catch my plane
home. So I don't have time to do the following checks to help figure out what to observe tonight and this week (if
telescopes ever really open). First, and most important, can someone check to see if S02-002 is still bright enough for us
to get another 6 hours or so on ISAAC to improve that signal to noise? Second, can someone look at the SN we have a
spectrum for at z ~ 0.49 that has evidence of being very low metallicity, and see if we could get an interesting blue spectrum,
in which case we might also want one or two hours of ISAAC
on it.?
clidman@eso.org wrote:
> Hi Saul,
> I provide a summary of what has been done with ISAAC to date.
>
> - S02-032, 31800 seconds, IQ=0.52, S/N=13
> - S02-002, 12000 seconds IQ=0.46, S/N=8
>
> I have assumed that both supernovae have J=24. In both images he S/N of the candidate
> is actually higher, which means that there is either host contamination, which is certainly
> true for S02-002, or that the SN is brighter than J=24.
>
> The S/N is computed from the nightly ZP, the sky noise in the combined image and is for an aperture
> with a diameter of 1 arc second.
>
> S02-002 was observed with Gemini as well. If the data is of similar quality, and I would expect that
> the Gemini data is deeper, since they probably use the classical J filter, then we might have enough on
> S02-002. It might also be a bit late for S02-002.
>
> ISAAC is in service until the 19th, which is a technical night. It is again in service from the 23rd onwards,
> but only for the first half of these nights
>
> There is 7.5 hours of ISAAC shutter time left. This could be used for:
>
> - the z=0.912 supernova.
> - a z=0.55 supernova (I do not have any in mind). To be meaningful scientifically, we would need good ground based
> followup and one would like to do more than one supernova at this redshift.
> - go deeper on the Beethoven reference (this would need 2 hours)
>
> It is not 100% clear to me if this time can be carried over to period 70. The OPC awarded the time for period 69, but since
> we have large program status, we may be able to carry over some time. I will ask ESO.
>
> Cheers, Chris.
>
> Saul Perlmutter wrote:
>
> > Hello Chris, I forgot to ask you about the current ISAAC time. Did
> > we get enough ISAAC signal-to-noise on the second z~1.1 SN from last
> > month, the one you did most recently? Or should we try to get another
> > 5 hours or so on it? I guess tonight is one of the options for this
> > and then we have a few more nights, before it would be to late? Also,
> > do we need to be scheduling this week's ISAAC time for any other
> > targets, if we decide not to do this high-redshift target?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu May 16 2002 - 13:54:20 PDT