From: Tony Spadafora (ALSpadafora@lbl.gov)
Date: Sat May 22 2004 - 18:28:59 PDT
Hi Natalia et al,
We may learn something from refinding the Apr candidates, so rather
than labelling acs04b-016 as prior = -1 ("probably junk") we
should collect these somewhere - maybe put it with -acs04-185 which
Rachel found?
By the way, it would be interesting if someone could see if we refind
two April cands that were brighter than the above two:
acs04-176 (z Apr = 23.7) (photo-z = 1.51)
acs04-194 (z Apr = 24.4) (photo-z = 0.74
-Tony
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat May 22 2004 - 18:29:46 PDT