Re: 9739/97S K-correction

From: Greg Aldering (aldering@panisse.lbl.gov)
Date: Tue May 20 2003 - 10:24:16 PDT

  • Next message: Robert A. Knop Jr.: "Re: 9739/97S K-correction"

    Hi Rob,

    The differences I find between the old and new kcor1 are much larger
    than you describe. I fully admit that I may be misunderstanding
    something here, but so you can see what I'm talking about, here is a
    table of oldkcor1-newkcor1 versus redshift for P99 SNe:

          z kcor1 diff
       ----------------------
         0.172 0.045
         0.180 0.003
         0.320 0.109
         0.374 0.108
         0.388 0.085
         0.400 0.056
         0.416 0.096
         0.425 0.120
         0.430 0.142
         0.430 0.110
         0.450 0.133
         0.450 0.128
         0.450 0.131
         0.453 0.128
         0.465 0.147
         0.472 0.146
         0.480 0.150
         0.490 0.154
         0.495 0.172
         0.498 0.172
         0.526 0.178
         0.570 0.293
         0.579 0.356
         0.580 0.279
         0.581 0.368
         0.592 0.302
         0.612 0.723 <--- 9739
         0.615 0.442
         0.619 0.435
         0.655 0.431
         0.656 0.541
         0.657 0.425
         0.763 -1.054
         0.828 -1.167
         0.830 -1.160

    The differences are not only large (perhaps a definition change?), but 9739 stands
    out from the trend.

    If there is a good explaination for this, then I guess my next concern
    would be in publishing this new magnitude for 9739 since the difference
    - using the same data - is well outside the quoted uncertainty.

    - Greg

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue May 20 2003 - 10:24:16 PDT