Comments on HST paper

From: Gerson Goldhaber (g_goldhaber@lbl.gov)
Date: Fri Feb 14 2003 - 11:26:59 PST

  • Next message: Tony Spadafora: "Agenda for SCP meeting Wed Feb 19"

    Hi Rob,
         I am very happy to see the HST data.
    First some trivial comments:

    1.In Intro. We did not discover evidence for lambda and HENCE
    acceleration of Universe.
    It was the other way round.We discovere the acceleration and hence
    evidence for lambda etc.

    2. P 2, "...by this time in Perlmutter ..." what does this mean?

    3. P3 "effected"should be affected also "...to each supernovae
    event." should be singular

    4. P6 2.2 "lightcurve first ..." should be fits also "(The
    exception is the seven ..." shold be ...exceptions are...

    5. P7 "...1997N at = -0.180." should be ...at z = 0.180."

    6. Table 3 note 3 "This is just ..." shold be "The error given is just
    ..."

    7. P15 "... except for H99..." shold be R99

    8. P 17 "... omitted as an outlet." shold be "outlier"

    9. P21 ".... explicitly correction ..." should be "correct"

    Comments with substance:

    1. I do not think we should show fig4 as drawn, since all it
    demonstrates is how poor our P99 color data was.
    Perhaps you could show the new HST data only in this figure.

    2. Question about Table 5. 1992bg and 1996ab have the same s and B-V
    with different E(B-V)_MW.
         How did you get the host galaxy color excess of -0.08 for 1996ab ?

                                                 Let us try to get your
    paper published in short order!
                                                                     cheers
    Gerson

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Feb 14 2003 - 11:27:12 PST