From: Robert A. Knop Jr. (robert.a.knop@vanderbilt.edu)
Date: Wed Mar 10 2004 - 05:14:47 PST
On Wed, Mar 10, 2004 at 01:13:29PM +0100, Serena Nobili wrote:
> For the difference you found between the results obtained using Rob's
> templates and mine, they agree with what have been already pointed out by
> Chris for K_JI. These differences are in fact within the quoted uncertainty
> of 0.05. I believe also that Rob's work in the I-band is probably not as
> accurate as in B,V and R, nor as in the Nobili et al. 2003 paper, since it
> was not a relevant band for the Knop et al paper (Rob, do you agree with
> this?). I any case, the quoted uncertainty (0.05) takes care of these
> differences, giving us confidence in what we are doing.
Probably that's right. My only care in the I-band for the Knop2003
paper was as something further down the spectrum from the R-band to keep
the R-band anchored. And, there were only two (three?) supernovae that
even really slopped much into the R-band (the two at z=0.3.) (The ones
up at z=0.1 slopped a bit into the blue side of the R-band.)
As such, I wasn't *so* worried about the I-band. The procedure I used
also didn't work as well with R-I as it did with B-V and V-R because
there was less data in R-I to tune up my colors. But I didn't worry
about it so much. I am confident that my R-I colors are better than
what was in the original Peter Uberspectrum, but I wouldn't be surprised
if they were off by a few hundredths of a magnitude.
-Rob
-- --Prof. Robert Knop Department of Physics & Astronomy, Vanderbilt University robert.a.knop@vanderbilt.edu
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Mar 10 2004 - 05:14:51 PST