Re: Figure 13 - extinction corrected?

From: Greg Aldering (aldering@panisse.lbl.gov)
Date: Thu May 22 2003 - 08:27:55 PDT

  • Next message: Robert A. Knop Jr.: "Re: Figure 13 - extinction corrected?"

    Yes, the problem is that the stretch-luminosity relation has never
    looked very good - we just have avoided ever showing it. I think the
    plot has useful information - that our HST SNe all have local
    counterparts even in the way they deviate from the stretch-luminosity
    relation. Some would think that comparing the stretch distributions
    should show the same thing, but then that is true only if SNe Ia are a
    one-parameter family of stretch, which the reader can decide from the
    figure.

    One thing that would make this issue more robust is if we had done a
    fit with alpha=0 and could say the cosmology wasn't much affected.

    >On Wed, May 21, 2003 at 07:12:11PM -0700, Greg Aldering wrote:
    >>
    >> Hi Rob,
    >>
    >> Are the data in Figure 13 corrected for extinction? If so, then you
    >> need to correct the label on the Y-axis. I would argue that we want to
    >> show the extinction-correct points. Also, which subsample is plotted
    >> here?
    >
    >They are extinction corrected; this is the primary subset, only HST and
    >Low-z supernovae.
    >
    >I agree that it doesn't look that great, although if you look at it
    >carefully I thikn the line that is fit makes sense, more sense than a
    >horizontal line would. However, first impressions aren't good, and I'd
    >not complain if we want to drop this figure from the paper.

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu May 22 2003 - 08:27:56 PDT