Re: Gabriele's paper

From: Chris Lidman (clidman@eso.org)
Date: Tue Aug 24 2004 - 14:56:48 PDT

  • Next message: Robert A. Knop Jr.: "Re: Ground Lightcurves (was Re: Gabriele's paper)"

    Hi Gabriele,

    >> - I do not think that figures 1a, 1b and 1c add anything to the
    >> paper.
    >> The spectra are already displayed in the VLT paper. I suggest that
    >> these
    >> figures are removed.
    >
    > I do not see why showing again in this paper the data we use for the
    > analysis should be a problem. Besides I think it makes easier for the
    > reader to check out the spectrum where the measurement has been done
    > without having to go to the other paper.
    >

    If you wish to add them to the paper then I'd suggest that you present
    them in one figure (rather than 14), that you plot them in the rest
    frame and that you order them by light-curve date. Since the galaxy
    subtraction was probably done differently to the way that it was
    done in the VLT paper (the VLT paper uses Andy's superfit program), you
    will have to describe the way you have done it in the paper.

    >> - The +9.5 and +29.5 day spectra of SN 2001go are not presented in the
    >> VLT paper. I think it would be worth having a separate section on this
    >> SN in the paper. It would be good if we could produce a plot which
    >> shows
    >> how this SNe can be matched at each epoch.
    >
    > I'm not sure I understand what you mean with: "plot which shows
    > how this SNe can be matched at each epoch". Would you like me to add a
    > section with comparison plots for each epoch bin?
    >

    The referee of the VLT paper was disappointed that we did not publish
    all three spectra on SN 2001go. In the VLT paper we show the first
    spectrum but not the other two. The plot I had been thinking about would
    have plotted the three spectra of SN 2001go with a local SNe (hopefully
    the same one) at each of the epochs. If these spectra are plotted in the
    figure I described above, then that would be sufficient.

    >> Overall
    >> =======
    >>
    >> At this point in time, I think that the paper might be better
    >> published
    >> as a letter, since it is presenting an analysis which has never been
    >> done before.
    >
    > I'm open to (almost) any form of publication as long as it happens
    > fast.
    >

    The paper is probably too long for a letter.

    Cheers, Chris.

    >> 

    -- 
European Southern Observatory
Alonso de Córdova 3107, Vitacura
Casilla 19001, Santiago 19
CHILE

    Ph. +56 2 463 3106
FAX +56 2 463 3101

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Sep 02 2004 - 10:16:32 PDT