From: Greg Aldering (aldering@panisse.lbl.gov)
Date: Thu May 01 2003 - 00:17:28 PDT
Hi Rob,
I'm going to have to enter my edits as I make my way through the paper
so as not to hold-up your progress. Here are edits for page 1-4. I
am including Eric Linder's edits as I go.
So far, these are relatively minor:
p1: Affiliations for Aldering are out of order (this is only case)
"... that confirm previous ..." ---> "... that confirms previous ..."
"... or equivalently a ..." ---> "... or equivalently, a ..."
"... large scale structure ..." ---> "... galaxy redshift distortion ..."
Several cases where X +Y -Z isn't correct for -Z
"... suffers significant ..." ---> "... suffer significant ..."
"... host-galaxy reddening ..." --> "... normal host-galaxy extinction ..."
In the footnotes: "#7336", etc. should be "GO-7336," etc.
p2: "... they yielded ..." ---> "... these studies yielded ..."
"... different linear combinations ..." Are they always linear?
p3: "... provide best ..." ---> "... provide the best ..."
"... even under the assumption of a flat universe ..." Shouldn't this be
"... even without the assumption of a flat universe ..." since for
a flat universe, OM ~ 0.3 implies dark energy?
Several cases through paper of "WPFC2" which should be "WFPC2"
"... is so much ..." ---> "... is much ..."
"... was possible with ..." ---> "... was possible for ..."
"... tend to redden ..." Is this too soft a statement. Perhaps this
clause should start "however, normal dust will redden the colors ..."
"These color usually dominate ..." --->
"Extinction corrections based on these color measurements usually dominate"
"... of errors in color ..." ---> "... from errors in color ..."
"... of this paper ..." ---> "... in this paper ..."
"... galaxy two-point correlation results." --->
"... galaxy redshift distortion measurements."
p4: When you say "March/April" are you just counting the search, or also the
references. If the latter, then you should also say "November/December"
for the first search.
"... are at spaced ..." ---> "... are spaced ..."
"0.3 < z < 0.8" ---> "0.3 < z < 0.9"
"... obtained at with ..." ---> "... obtained with ..."
"... LRIS (Oke ....) ... Keck 10-m telescope." --->
"... LRIS ... Keck 10-m telescope (Oke ...)."
"... as type Ia ..." ---> "... as Type~Ia ..." (our use "type" everywhere)
"For these all were identified as being of Type Ia ..." -->
"These were identified as Type Ia ..." -->
"Sne Ib/c ..." ---> "SNe~Ib/c ..."
"... the redshift z of each ..." ---> ".. the redshift, z, of each ..."
Take first sentance of paragraph starting with "Each of ..." and
"Supernovae were ..." and combine into one, like this:
"Each of these supernovae were imaged with two broadband filters using
the Planetary Camera (PC) chip of WFPC2, which as a scale of 0.046 "/pixel."
Then eliminate the "Supernovae were ..." sentance starting the next
paragraph.
Where you discuss the filter curves, is there a reference?
"... flux should be constant ..." ---> "... flux is constant ..."
(Unless you are suggesting that there are variable galaxies!)
"... which fit a PSF ..." ---> "... which fits a PSF ..."
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu May 01 2003 - 00:17:29 PDT