[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: GSC 00279 00321 paper
On Wednesday, June 12, 2002, at 10:39 AM, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
> Comments on the paper, pdf version:
> You know the coordinates more accurately than that (I gave
> you the list); please use higher accuracy! The Tycho-2
> coordinates are what I would use, and indicate that the
> coordinates are from Tycho-2. It does make a difference,
> especially when cross-referencing to other catalogs.
Dirk had suggested I use less precision. I'm not sure why. I can easily
add the additional precision.
> I think you should include Tom as a coauthor since you
> are using his data and listing the Mark IV as one of the
> telescopes. At minimum, give the location of the Mark IV
> and Tom's email adr, since someone could be interested in
> contacting him directly for the dataset. I know he does not
> care about authorship, but it is common courtesy unless someone
> strongly objects.
I will add Tom as an author unless he objects.
> Ic is not properly subscripted; example is "11.44 in I_".
That shows up correctly for me as a capital I with a subscript C.
> You do not refer to your references.
How would you suggest I do that? I guess the references currently are sort
of a "see also" in regards to TASS.
> You say "unfiltered variance between 11.36 and 12.00"; again,
> you need to specifically indicate that this is unfiltered with
> V-band zeropoint, in the text of the paper as well as on the figure,
> and define the term CV.
I thought about that. I will get explicit on that.
> In fact, I have problems with all of the magnitudes listed for
> the photometry. First, I would use the TASS-derived V magnitudes
> for the comp stars rather than their GSC values. If you are going
> to continue using the GSC values, you need to investigate at minimum
> whether the GSC is on the V-band system in this field. Second, I
> am not positive where Dirk's photometry is on these plots. Certainly
> Dirk's photometry is not "CV", so at minimum I would use different
> colors or symbols for his data if it does appear somewhere.
I do not have Dirk's data in a plot. I'll add one more plot of his data?
> I am willing to bet that the editor/referee will ask how the
> V,Ic magnitudes are calculated (especially the zeropoints)
> for the TASS camera data. You should be prepared to answer that question.
OK, can someone tell me how to answer that question? ;)
I have a question about that: when we are talking about differences in
magnitudes, is it important that we have the zeropoints at all? In my
unfiltered plots, for example, I'm just trying to demonstrate the change
in brightness, the minimums, the days I took data, etc. I'm not claiming
that my magnitudes mean anything except in a relative way. Is that bad?
> Getting closer!
High praise from you, Arne! ;)