From - Fri May 9 19:34:07 2003 Return-Path: Received: from postala.lbl.gov ([128.3.41.61]) by imapd.lbl.gov (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with ESMTP id HE42A700.8QV for ; Tue, 29 Apr 2003 08:13:19 -0700 Received: from postala.lbl.gov (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by postala.lbl.gov (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h3TFDGgI003086 for ; Tue, 29 Apr 2003 08:13:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sauls.lbl.gov (IDENT:Nbs/FIsYcKuofeHJULu9ZAOxkCLy/fVT@sauls.lbl.gov [128.3.33.126]) by postala.lbl.gov (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h3TFDGLw003082; Tue, 29 Apr 2003 08:13:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (nugent@localhost) by sauls.lbl.gov (8.11.6/8.11.2) with ESMTP id h3TFDDF16439; Tue, 29 Apr 2003 08:13:13 -0700 Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 08:13:12 -0700 (PDT) From: Peter Nugent Reply-To: penugent@lbl.gov To: Gabriele Garavini cc: Tony Spadafora , Greg Aldering , Ariel Goobar Subject: Re: 1999aa draft In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by postala.lbl.gov id h3TFDGgI003086 > SN1992A -5 in fig 4 Kirshner et al 1993, ApJ 415 589 > SN1991T max in fig 5 Phillips 1992 AJ 103, 1632 > SN1990N 7 in fig 6 It comes from either Leibundgut 1991, ApJ, 371 L23, Mazzali 1992 A&A 269,= =20 423 or Phillips 1992 AJ 103, 1632 > I also could not understand a comment you made on page 11 at the end=20 > of the left side, something with 'CIII \lambda4648.8=C5' and 'consisten= t'. > I missed the rest of the comment in the conversion between your letter=20 > format fax and my A4.=20 The question is whether or not seeing CIII at these velocities compared t= o=20 the CII lines at the other velocities paints a consistent picture. I=20 believe Dan Kasen has a way of checking this out nicely so please forward= =20 the paper onto him and he can look at this question, he also make a good=20 final referee. > For the residual fringing I think it does not effect the analysis and=20 > anyway we can't do much about it since we do not have the calibration f= or=20 > the correction.=20 Oh, I realize that it might not effect much, but it does look sloppy.=20 there is nothing we can do about this? Greg is there anything you know of= ? Cheers, Peter --=20 Peter E. Nugent Staff Computational Scientist - Scientific Computing Group - NERSC Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory M.S. 50F-1650 - 1 Cyclotron Road - Berkeley, CA, 94720-8139 Phone:(510) 486-6942 - Fax:(510) 486-5812 E-mail: penugent@LBL.gov - Web: http://supernova.LBL.gov/~nugent