From: Reynald Pain (Reynald.Pain@in2p3.fr)
Date: Wed Jun 05 2002 - 15:49:45 PDT
Hi Andy,
Sorry for the late answer:
> I still want to know what you think about additional spectroscopy on
> C02-016 Votez Chirax and C02-028 Prolix.
>
I thinks it would (have been!) worth in particular for VotezChirax since
it is a stange beast (LCwise). My understanding from your notes or
Lifang's (I forgot where I got that) is that prolix is either Ia or Ic.
If there is a way to clarify that with more spectroscopy this is worth.
doing.
But unfortunatly all this is wishfull thinking. the weather seems to
be making the choice for us these days...
Reynald
> -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