Hi!!
Last week, I mentioned that I had a new task assigned to me from my on-site advisor. I had some trouble understanding what he was trying to say, but after a few emails, I realized he was asking me to standardize supernovae type II.
At first, I had no idea where to start. Supernovae type Ia (explosions of white dwarf stars) all have a absolute magnitude near -19.3. This is because these stars all explode when they reach a certain mass limit. Hence, they explode at roughly the same size and burn off the same amount of energy. That makes things easier for standardization of type Ia supernovae, but supernovae type II are a different scenario.
In order to standardize the supernovae (find a similar luminosity in all super massive explosions), I needed to measure the peak magnitudes of my selected supernovae and plot them against the amount of time it takes for them to decrease to 95% of their peak magnitudes. In other the words, plot them against the fading supernovae. I came up with this with the help of my BASIS advisor, Dr. Whaley. We met on Tuesday this week, for about an hour, and tried to figure out how to go about doing this. The method we came up with was then passed on to my professor at ASU. He said that was correct, but he also wanted me to try another method. Instead of 95%, he wanted me to add 1 to the peak magnitudes. It's essentially the same thing, just different values.
I've done both, and the next step is to find the standard deviation of the magnitudes. That will be my task for next week, for afterwards, I will have to plot my corrected mags. I am reaching a conclusion, and to know that I am on the right track is exciting.
I am still looking at my emails, waiting for him to email me about night time observing. It's been especially difficult recently, due to the clouds that have been above us for the last few days.
That's what I have been up to this week. I hope you enjoyed reading. As always, any questions you have, please leave them below. Check back next week for updated progress.
I have attached a picture of my table for the data values. Unfortunately, I could not get a big enough picture on here. That said, you probably won't be able to read the values. I just attached it to show you the size of the table that was required to reach a plausible conclusion.
Last week, I mentioned that I had a new task assigned to me from my on-site advisor. I had some trouble understanding what he was trying to say, but after a few emails, I realized he was asking me to standardize supernovae type II.
At first, I had no idea where to start. Supernovae type Ia (explosions of white dwarf stars) all have a absolute magnitude near -19.3. This is because these stars all explode when they reach a certain mass limit. Hence, they explode at roughly the same size and burn off the same amount of energy. That makes things easier for standardization of type Ia supernovae, but supernovae type II are a different scenario.
In order to standardize the supernovae (find a similar luminosity in all super massive explosions), I needed to measure the peak magnitudes of my selected supernovae and plot them against the amount of time it takes for them to decrease to 95% of their peak magnitudes. In other the words, plot them against the fading supernovae. I came up with this with the help of my BASIS advisor, Dr. Whaley. We met on Tuesday this week, for about an hour, and tried to figure out how to go about doing this. The method we came up with was then passed on to my professor at ASU. He said that was correct, but he also wanted me to try another method. Instead of 95%, he wanted me to add 1 to the peak magnitudes. It's essentially the same thing, just different values.
I've done both, and the next step is to find the standard deviation of the magnitudes. That will be my task for next week, for afterwards, I will have to plot my corrected mags. I am reaching a conclusion, and to know that I am on the right track is exciting.
I am still looking at my emails, waiting for him to email me about night time observing. It's been especially difficult recently, due to the clouds that have been above us for the last few days.
That's what I have been up to this week. I hope you enjoyed reading. As always, any questions you have, please leave them below. Check back next week for updated progress.
I have attached a picture of my table for the data values. Unfortunately, I could not get a big enough picture on here. That said, you probably won't be able to read the values. I just attached it to show you the size of the table that was required to reach a plausible conclusion.
This definitely seems like a very difficult process to reach any conclusion, but I am glad everything is going well! Good luck and don't stress out too much. (I know I would if I had to interpret all of that data.)
ReplyDeleteSound great Max! I must say that this all sounds like tedious work but, I'm glad you're taking all the necessary steps toward receiving accurate data--nice job! I hope you get a chance to experience a night time observing done soon! Other than that, good luck and have a great rest of your week!
ReplyDeleteReally cool stuff Max! I like that you managed to standardize the supernovae using two different methods since that gives quality experience with the technology. I'm excited for the upcoming information!
ReplyDelete