From: Mamoru Doi (email@example.com)
Date: Wed Apr 30 2003 - 09:33:38 PDT
It took me a while to send this e-mail, sorry.
We have had a network trouble since last week.
As many of you already know, the IAUCs 8119, 8120,
and 8121 reported SNe found with Subaru last fall.
There are 13 spectroscopically confirmed SNe on 8119 and 8120,
and 5 apparent SNe on 8121.
The IDs are
IAU SCP Name
They didn't include 4 candidates. Dan Green answered the reason
in the following way.
>Thank you very much for the IAUC 8119, 8120, and 8121.
>I have a brief question about the apparent SNe you have
>chosen in IAUC8121. You reported 5 apparent SNe out of 9
>I infer the reason why you didn't include other 4 are
> SuF-076, 086, 057: too faint (low S/N)
> SuF-007 : no host
>Is this right? I just want to know your criteria.
>Yes, we had long discussions about this. We concluded
>that, for very faint supernova suspects where there is no
>spectroscopy to confirm them as supernovae and no visible
>host, it is perhaps best to not designate them as supernovae.
>Now, if there were enough light-curve data to show
>definitively that an object displays a supernova light
>curve, perhaps we could designate such an object, but then
>we would need to publish *all* of the magnitude data as
>evidence of this.
>Kind regards, Dan
We should describe more details in a refereed paper
(Some probable redshifts were not included in IAUCs, for example.)
Also Japanese group would like to have a press release
through Subaru observatory in about a month. The main issue is
that the central SXDS field (one Suprime-Cam filed) contains
12 SNe in one shot.
Institute of Astronomy
School of Science
University of Tokyo
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Apr 30 2003 - 10:06:22 PDT