From: Mamoru Doi (doi@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp)
Date: Sat Jul 10 2004 - 17:21:12 PDT
Dear Gerson,
We got some photo-z for HST followup targets, but
we haven't tried other ones.
It may be too difficult to get photo-z of these targets quickly,
especially because those are possibly at high z and we didn't have
NIR photometry yet.
but SXDS team is now making a new photo-z catalog with some NIR data,
They will give us new photo-z within a couple of months.
As for photometry, Naoki improved his code, and Tomoki measured
most of SNe in SNTrack. We still see some inconsistency between
these two independent analysis, and are working to understand
the difference.
Let us tell you when we get new results.
-Mamoru
>Dear Mamoru, Naoki and Chris,
> In preparation for our collaboration meeting I am looking at the
>Subaru data in greater detail. Let me first state that these SNe are an
>excellent sample which should give us important cosmological information.
>There are 13 SNe with unknown redshift.
> From the lightcurve fits, and particularly the maximum magnitudes, I
>got a very rough estimate of the expected redshifts.
>
>z > 1.3 SuF02-076, -086
>z > 1 SuF02-J01, -051, -057, -014, -004, -J02
>z 0.9 to 1 SuF02-058, -056
>z < 0.8 SuF02-034, SXDS_2-9, SXDS_2-4
>
>Is there any information from photo-z, or could we get host galaxy spectra?
>Together with the measured redshifts, there is thus a potentially very
>substantial set of SNe with z > 1, namely 16.
>Other comments.
>1. I have plotted the SNe with known redshift on a Hubble plot,for our
>favorit cosmology and find that the SNe magnitudes are dimmer than
>expected by about 0.7 mag. ie. they follow the hubble curve with larger
>magnitudes by about this offset. Calibration?
>2. As I mentioned before, I question the calibration on Julian day
>52616. Data taken on this day is high in normalized flux, with respect
>to all other dates. This was noticeable in SNe : SuF02-000, -004, -012,
>-019, -057, -081. The correction factor needed to bring these point in
>agreement with the other data points is about 0.7 in flux.
>3. Other SNe with some apparently inconsistent points are: SuF02-007,
>-017, -034, -065, -071, -082
>4.Two SNe SuF02-019 and -082 appear too dim by about 1.5 magnitudes.
>Could they be at a higher redshift??
>5.Two of the SNe SuF2-014 and -081 have exceptionally small stretch,
>about 0.45. In our earlier study we had one such SN,
>sn9571 at z=0.866, which Greg had studied. These 3 form a rather unique
> set which needs to be explained. The one other SN I know of in the
>Hamuy et al SN sn1992br with stretch measured between 0.53 to 0.63
>(depending on the details of the fit). Alex Conley has several with
>stretch arround somewhat over 0.6.
>Hopefully we will be able to resolve some of these matters at our
>collaboration meeting.
> cheers Gerson
>
>
>
Mamoru Doi
Institute of Astronomy
School of Science
University of Tokyo
voice +81-422-34-5084
fax. +81-422-34-5041
doi@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Jul 10 2004 - 17:23:23 PDT