Hi all - > Date: Fri, 5 May 2006 14:34:30 -0700 (PDT) > From: "Kem Cook" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Hi, > > So, we may not need all the static data, but I thought that it would be > value added to be able to say that a new transient occured at the position > of a known, but non-variable object (say a distant, barely resolved > galaxy), or that a new transient appeared x arcsec offset from the > nucleus of a rather well resolved galaxy. or that there was a transient at > the position of a known M dwarf (perviously non-variable). > > Kem
I think this is absolutely the case. A recent preprint by Shri Kulkarni (astro-ph/0604343) indicates that we are going to have a heck of a time separating true cosmological transients from a "foreground fog" of M-dwarf flares. Our alerts must be able to include this precusor information in our likelihood calculations, as well as in the body of the alert itself, to enable follow-up to discriminate against faint, unresolved, red precursors. Cheers, Andy _______________________________________________ LSST-data mailing list [email protected] http://www.lsstmail.org/mailman/listinfo/lsst-data
