Re: More on IR photometry

From: Chris Lidman (clidman@eso.org)
Date: Wed Feb 11 2004 - 10:05:28 PST

  • Next message: Serena Nobili: "updated version of the paper"

    Hi Serena
       The second sentence should have read.

    If we choose to apply this correction, then the systematic error
    is 0.02 magnitudes."

    Cheers, Chris.

    On Wed, 2004-02-11 at 15:10, Serena Nobili wrote:
    > Hi Chris,
    >
    > thanks for your document, it is a useful work you have done to clarify
    > this point. My personal opinion is that adding a 0.05 mag uncertainties to
    > all the SNe is the easiest way to go, especially since we don't know what
    > system they have used in Tonry and Riess'papers. Moreover, correcting for
    > this small amount is not changing the results we present. Anyway, let's
    > see what the rest of the collaboration would like.
    > I have one question about the section called "conclusions". You say:
    >
    > "If we choose not to apply the correction, then a suitable
    > systematic error for IR-optical colors should be 0.05 magnitudes and
    > this should be added to the systematic error which is listed in table 8.
    >
    > If we choose not to apply this correction, then the systematic error
    > is 0.02 magnitudes."
    >
    > The second sentence seems to contradict the first one. Am I missing
    > something?
    > Cheers
    >
    > Serena
    >
    >
    > On 11 Feb 2004, Chris Lidman wrote:
    >
    > >Hi Serena,
    > > I've had a more detailed look at the issue of optical-IR colours and I
    > >attach a note which we can use for this evenings discussion.
    > >
    > >Cheers, Chris.
    > >

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Feb 11 2004 - 10:14:33 PST