From: Chris Lidman (clidman@eso.org)
Date: Thu Apr 01 2004 - 08:54:52 PST
Hi Reynald,
Thanks, this is extremely useful.
It will be important to follow-up on the reasons we gave C02-030 an
IAU name and why C02-031 is no longer in our databases.
>From the photometry, C02-016, C02-034, C02-028 are clearly SNe. In each
case, the candidate is not on the center of the host and there are
several points in each lightcurve.
I comment on individual candidates.
On Wed, 2004-03-31 at 20:16, Reynald Pain wrote:
> Hi Chris et al.
>
> I had a look at 2002 rolling search SNe. Here is the outcome:
> (I got the info from "supernovae.in2p3.fr/~raux and rob's database)
>
> - C02-16/2002fr/"votezchirax" I-filter LC of ~10 points : looks like
> a Ia but hard to say (may be falling a bit fast) (id as I?)
In the VLT paper, C02-016 is not classified.
>From the comments in SN track, the spectral classification
is highly uncertain Ib/c from Peter, 91T from Lifan, ? from Andy,
Sylvain fits a 91T.
The percentage increase is 680%. This is very large.
It was not detected on April 12th but it was clearly seen on
April 17th. The spectrum was taken on May 5th.
Would a 91T classification be consistent with the light-curve? I
doubt it. As noted by Saul, the rise time on this one is very steep.
For the VLT spectroscopic paper, I will leave this as ?, but I will make
a note that it is a supernova.
> - C02-028/2002fm/"prolix" I-filter LC of 6 points before and at max
> (we may have more data). looks like a Ia but hard to say! (id as Ia in
> Rob's db)
In the VLT paper, C02-028 is not classified.
>From the comments in SN track, no type is given although it is noted
that there are broad SN like features. Andy gives two possible
Ia fits, but is not convinced by either. Sylvain fits a Ia +4d with 70%
of the light coming from an Sb template.
The percentage increase is 13%. This is a hard candidate to confirm
spectroscopically.
It was not detected on April 12th but it was seen on
April 17th. The spectrum was taken on May 18th.
The VLT spectrum is dominated by host galaxy light; however, I think
that the bumps mentioned in the SN track database are there.
The candidate is clearly a supernova, but typing it from the spectrum
is hard. From the spectroscopy it remains unclassifed (or Ia? at best),
but from the photometry, it is clearly a supernova and I will note this
in the paper. It might be worth trying to work a bit harder on the
clasiifying this one from the spectrum.
> - C02-030/2002fp/"troudux" : could not find a tile for this one
In the VLT paper, C02-030 is not classified.
>From SN track, no type is given.
The percentage increase is 54%.
I presume that this must have been given a IAU name on the basis of the
photometry. It will be important to verify this.
The VLT spectrum was taken on May 12th.
> - C02-031 : this one is not in Julien's list nor in Rob's list. Do you
> know the coordinates ?
RA(2000) 14:01:38.07 DEC(2000) +04:38:02.23
In the VLT paper, C02-031 is not classified, but Andy classifies this as
II?
The percentage increase is 18%. This is a hard candidate to confirm
spectroscopically.
Given the percentage increase and the fact that the galaxy spectrum
shows H-alpha, H-beta, [OIII] in emission and classification of II?
is probably not unreasonable.
I will change the classification from ? to II? in the paper.
> - C02-034: only 3 points in the I LC. probably detected late.
>
In the VLT paper, C02-034 is not classified.
>From SN track, no type is given.
The percentage increase is 19%. Another tough candidate.
The VLT spectrum was taken on May 18th. The first detection is on May
11th. On April 22nd, nothing is seen in the CFHT images. We might
have caught this candidate very early..
Even though there are only three light curve points, it is clearly a
supernova. The candidate is well off the center of the bright host.
> There were a few more classified as Ia of I? in this run which I do not
> see in your list.
> Spectra may have been taken at other telescopes? This make me think
> that one should
> be careful in concluding on the "efficiencies" as certain candidates
> were observed on
> different telescopes depending on which telescopes was available. This
> can give a
> large bias.
You are correct. I have made this point in the paper very clear.
Cheers, Chris.
> All together adding Ia+I? on julien's list makes ~1/3 of all object
> spectred.
>
> I hope this helps
> Cheers
> Reynald
> PS: looking at thes LC makes me think that we have a few in that sample
> that are worth
> analysing (we have R+I observations)...
> __
> reynald.pain@in2p3.fr
> LPNHE, University Paris VI & VII, 4 Place Jussieu, 75252 Paris Cedex 05
> Tel: +33 1 44 27 72 53 - Fax: +33 1 44 27 46 38 - LBL: +1 510 495 2595
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Apr 01 2004 - 08:56:47 PST