From: Saul Perlmutter (saul@lbl.gov)
Date: Mon Jun 03 2002 - 19:50:55 PDT
...I think you meant Comix in the first paragraph of this email, not Prolix
(which you are still interested in, as mentioned in the second paragraph).
Andy Howell wrote:
> Reynald,
> Saul showed me some things that I didn't realize from your light curve
> charts, so disregard what I said about Prolix being ok if you throw out
> the first LC point. It may be AGN-ish. I can also see why you wouldn't
> suggest any of the ones we don't already have spectra on -- most of
> their light curves are not so great.
>
> I still want to know what you think about additional spectroscopy on
> C02-016 Votez Chirax and C02-028 Prolix.
>
> -Andy
>
> Andy Howell wrote:
>
> > Reynald Pain wrote:
> >
> >> Saul, Chris,
> >>
> >> This is to confirm that we seem to have reasonable spectroscopy for
> >> the late CFHT candidates that will have decent LC and therefore do
> >> not need additional spectro. If there is leftover time you may want
> >> to try a late spectrum of C02-00 (assurancetourix) or C02-008
> >> Abraracourcix which are Ia at 0.26(8) if the spectrscopy experts think
> >> this is worth doing.
> >>
> > Reynald,
> >
> > C02-000 Assurancetourix looks great from a spectroscopy standpoint --
> > it is an obvious Ia. I do not think we need to revisit it, since
> > there are other SNe that should take priority from a scienntific point
> > of view. It looks like it was caught after max, judging from the light
> > curve.
> >
> > C02-008 looks like a good Ia as well, and I don't think it needs
> > another spectrum. Note that you (and SN Trak) call it Abraracourcix,
> > but I have listed as descenteaHaurix2, whatever that means.
> >
> > I think there are other CFHT SNe that may be in need of better
> > spectroscopy though.
> > Below I list all of the CFHT SNe with light curves and what I think of
> > their spectra:
> >
> > SNe with no spectra:
> > C02-001 Bichomabix: No spectrum. Too faint now?
> > C02-013 Isntix: No spectrum. This was on the list for quite a while
> > -- have we given up on it?
> > C02-029 Comix: No spectrum. If you throw out the first point the LC
> > is ok.
> > C02-032 ItneedAfix: No spectrum. Not a good light curve. Not worth
> > the time.
> > PastMax5: Past max. No spectrum, but not worth the time. LC is past
> > max.
> > C02-033 Philanthropix. No spectrum
> >
> > SNe for which another spectrum would be useful:
> > C02-028 Prolix: The spectrum is certainly not conclusive as a Ia. It
> > may be dominated by galaxy light. It is possible that a second
> > spectrum could help. z=0.448
> > C02-016 VotezChirax: Its heritage is disputed. If we are going to
> > use this, we need another spectrum. May be SN 1991T-like, which would
> > also make it interesting. Then again, it may also be reddened, which
> > would mean it is not worth trying. Peter recommended not spending any
> > more time on this. I would agree with throwing it out, but again, if
> > you are going to try to use it, then another spectrum is necessary.
> >
> > SNe that have spectra, but don't look like Ia's:
> > C02-030 Troudux: Not a Ia? Chris says no obvious features in the
> > spectrum, which is blue. I agree with Chris. No point in getting
> > another spectrum of this one.
> > C02-034 InTheMix: Probably not a Ia. No light curve? Not worth
> > spending time on.
> > C02-027 Found in cross-telescope subtraction. No clear SN features.
> > Not worth spending time on.
> >
> > Forgotten SNe:
> > C02-026 cand0015 Found in cross-telescope subtraction. No spectra.
> > What does the light curve look like? Did the French find it?
> > Whatever happened to C02-014 Falbala, and C02-015 Alambix?
> >
> > So are you not planning on doing anything with the ones without
> > spectra? What about C02-016 or C02-028?
> > -Andy
> >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Jul 17 2002 - 16:12:44 PDT