From: Rachel A. Gibbons (ragibbons@lbl.gov)
Date: Fri Jul 02 2004 - 09:57:05 PDT
I fly out today and won't be reachable if for some reason there should
be further discussion with Adam, so I don't want to be the point of
contact on this. Since we're offering 1/2 a field of search area more
than Adam thought was reasonable, he shouldn't reject the plan.
One may think it's silly to give Adam prio on more than he asked for,
but the numbers are fair. Still, if you're considering going with the
integer 10/5 split instead, flip a coin for which to send. Heads, 9.5/5.5
split, tails 10/5 split.
I just flipped - it's heads.
Please send the plan with a short explanation.
Have a nice holiday weekend. Rob and I will be working I'm afraid,
but who wants to "enjoy" the outdoors on 4th of July weekend in
swamp-world. I'd rather stay in the air conditioned office.
Ciao,
Rachel
On Thu, 1 Jul 2004, Robert A. Knop Jr. wrote:
> 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
>
>
>
>
-- ------------------------------ Dr. R. A. Gibbons Lawrence Berkeley National Lab 1 Cyclotron Rd MS 50R5032 Berkeley, CA 94720-8160 USA Tel 510.486.7416 ------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Jul 02 2004 - 09:57:48 PDT