From: Alex Conley (aconley@panisse.lbl.gov)
Date: Thu Nov 07 2002 - 15:21:48 PST
I have been attempting to make sure that the candidates Saul gave in
his table have been seen in all of the different subtractions.
SuF02-082 is an object which was not seen the first two times
that the field (SXDS_1_b) was scanned. Looking into this further,
it appears that it is present on nov3 and nov6, but it is not
readily apparent in the nov2 data.
It's not quite completely obvious that this is true because the nov2
subtractions are a ratty. So it's quite possible that the seeing was just
enough worse on nov2 to hide the candidate. But if you look at the later
subtractions this is a blindingly obvious candidate which bows out the
galaxy contours quite substantially, and it seems hard to believe we
wouldn't have seen it easily in the nov2 data as well.
Various tiles are now available on the findingchart page, but to
summarize:
SXDS_1_b_0 subtraction NEW1: nov2 NEW2: nov3 nothing really there on nov2,
there on nov3
SXDS_1_b_1 subtraction NEW1: nov2 NEW2: nov3 same story, better seeing
SXDS_1_b_2 subtraction NEW1: nov2 NEW2: nov3 same story
SXDS_1_b_3 subtraction NEW1: nov3 NEW2: nov6 Very clear in both
SXDS_1_b_4 subtractoni NEW1: nov2+nov3 NEW2: nov6 clear in both
So -- somebody should think about this, and decide how much they
believe that it isn't there on nov2. If it really isn't we should
definitely observe it.
Alex
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Nov 07 2002 - 15:22:09 PST