From: Serena Nobili (serena@physto.se)
Date: Sat Jan 24 2004 - 09:39:10 PST
Dear Vitaliy,
These results (all of them) are very interesting and might be the reason
why they were not published yet!!! The only information missing for my
analysis was indeed the stretch factor, but I am also using the time of B
maximum given in the paper as input to some of the analyses. Given this, I
need to think how to proceed.
One possibility for the discrepancy, is in the K-corrections. We have
already checked with the paper by Tonry et al.(2003) that K-corrections in
the infrared were different, I would not be surprised to find that the
same is true for the optical. It would be good if you could check the
K-corrections given in Tonry for a SN at about the same redshift as 1999Q,
for the same filters, and see if yours agree with theirs. I think it is
important you do the checks, for consistency with the templates you are
using to compute them.
Another thing to try is to see whether we can reproduce the B-I given
for 1999Q in Riess et al. I can have a look at this.
Can you send me the plots you get for each of the cases? I would
like to see how the lightcurve fit looks like for each of them.
One thing is sure: the problems I have encountered since I started looking
at the case of 1999Q are almost infinite. The mismatch between the
table and the plot is only the top of the iceberg. I really want to see
how much more we can discover on this.
Thank you very much for your precious collaboration.
Cheers
Serena
On Fri, 23 Jan 2004, Vitaliy Fadeyev wrote:
>
>
>Hi Serena,
>
>these are the results of my fits to SN 1999Q lightcurves:
>
>case m_B dm_R m_B_corr dm_B_corr s ds chisq dof m_R kcorr_R kcorr_I tmax dtmax R-I d(R-I)
>1 22.82 0.06 23.02 0.16 1.117 0.054 5.29 8 22.06 -0.764 -0.310 2451186.54 1.444 -0.054 0.074
>2 23.43 0.03 23.59 0.08 1.086 0.031 19.85 9 22.39 -1.042 -0.531 2451197.52 0.000 -0.323 0.029
>3 23.14 0.02 23.34 0.07 1.119 0.032 9.95 9 22.24 -0.902 -0.419 2451191.83 0.853 -0.188 0.035
>
>The fit "cases" are as follows:
>1) stand-alone HST data, no constraints. In this case, the day
>of max is shifted to earlier time by 11 days compared to what
>Riess has reported. The Chi^2 is good (too good).
>2) the maximum is fixed to the Riess's value. The Chi^2 becomes
>"bad".
>3) Greg pointed out that IAU circular contains the I band discovery
>magnitude. I assumed that that data value has error of 10%
>and that it was measured with similar filter to F814W. Adding
>this point resulted in third case. The day of max is about 6 days
>earlier than reported value, Chi^2 is good.
>
>So, you can take this with appropriately sized grain of salt or
>other substances. Feel free to critisize.
>
>If B band stretch value is all you care about, then it seems that
>proper value would be about 1.1 . However, the time-of-max discrepancy
>is worriesome.
>
>Cheers,
>vitaliy
>
>
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------ www.physto.se/~serena Tel +46 8 55378661
Give free food at: http://www.porloschicos.com/ http://www.thehungersite.com/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Jan 24 2004 - 09:39:17 PST