From: Robert A. Knop Jr. (robert.a.knop@vanderbilt.edu)
Date: Sat May 03 2003 - 15:15:33 PDT
On Sat, May 03, 2003 at 03:06:54PM -0700, Alex Kim wrote:
> Will the probability array tell you anything anyways? The purpose of
> this was to measure the bias. The error bars we have do not reflect SCP
> statistical errors. We didn't redo your fit in other words.
What I'm doing is quoting the change in the most likely value from the
joint probability of the three measurements when the supernovae have a
systematic offset.
From the data, I can't give you a "peak w". Or, I could, but it would
not be very meaningful, as the confidence intervals aren't even
approximately ellipses. As such, figuring out a way to quantify the
systematic error for the SN data alone is challenging. With the other
two priors applied, there is a nice peak value of w with clean error
bars on both sides; that's why I'm doing the systematics this way. As
such, I need to do them *all* this way. I'm very sure that that offset
you quoted me for just the supernovae is much larger than what I'd get
putting the mass prior in.
-Rob
-- --Prof. Robert Knop Department of Physics & Astronomy, Vanderbilt University robert.a.knop@vanderbilt.edu
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat May 03 2003 - 15:15:36 PDT