From: Robert A. Knop Jr. (robert.a.knop@vanderbilt.edu)
Date: Thu Jul 01 2004 - 21:53:17 PDT
That's fine. Send the proposal to Adam.
-Rob
On Thu, Jul 01, 2004 at 07:53:20PM -0700, Tony Spadafora wrote:
> HST search,
>
> Rachel and I just went over the distribution plan and propose the
> follow. The attached spreadsheet has the details.
>
> By orbit ratio of 19/33 they get 5.5/we get 9.5 tiles. We propose to
> give them the 5 contiguous tiles Adam suggested plus the (north) half
> of 35 -
> this is 29,30,33,34,36 and north half of 35. The extra half-tile
> brings us very close to the desired target - whether you consider tiles
> unweighted or weighted by overlap with the May search, this comes to
> within a few percent of the target ratio (see the spreadsheet).
>
> The two tiles which we think have a higher than normal probability of
> failure due to guide star limitations are 29 and 30 (in Adam's
> section.) If they or any tile fails in one team's area, they get the
> remaining half of tile 35. This will bring the ratio to 9/5, which is
> close 33/19.
>
> In the unlikely event that a SN falls on the edges of two adjacent
> tiles, then we do something appropriate like rolling a die with 1-4
> for us, 5-6 for them.
>
> Does dividing in contiguous blocks change our probability of finding a
> high z SN? For z>1.2 , the statistics for the past two searches (plus
> what they found in the North in the GOODs search) seems too low to say
> anything about clustering.
>
> -Tony and Rachel
-- --Prof. Robert Knop Department of Physics & Astronomy, Vanderbilt University robert.a.knop@vanderbilt.edu
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jul 01 2004 - 21:56:00 PDT