4.1 Article

Subaru FOCAS Spectroscopic Observations of High-Redshift Supernovae

Journal

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/pasj/62.1.19

Keywords

cosmology: observations; stars: supernovae: general; surveys

Funding

  1. Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS)
  2. Oskar Klein Centre at the University of Stockholm
  3. Ministry of Education, Science, Culture, and Sports of Japan [15204012, 17104002]
  4. NASA [GO-10496, NAS 5-26555]
  5. U.S. Department of Energy [AC02-05CH11231]
  6. Science and Technology Facilities Council [ST/H000704/1, ST/H002456/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  7. STFC [ST/H000704/1, ST/H002456/1] Funding Source: UKRI

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We present spectra of high-redshift supernovae (SNe) that were taken with the Subaru low-resolution optical spectrograph, FOCAS. These SNe were found in SN surveys with Suprime-Cam on Subaru, the CFH12k camera on the Canada-France-Hawaii Telescope, and the Advanced Camera for Surveys on the Hubble Space Telescope. These SN surveys specifically targeted z > 1 Type la supernovae (SNe Ia). From the spectra of 39 candidates, we obtained redshifts for 32 candidates and spectroscopically identified 7 active candidates as probable SNe Ia, including one at z = 1.35, which is the most distant SN la to be spectroscopically confirmed with a ground-based telescope. An additional 4 candidates were identified as likely SNe la from the spectrophotometric properties of their host galaxies. Seven candidates are not SNe la, either being SNe of another type or active galactic nuclei. When SNe la were observed within one week of the maximum light, we found that we could spectroscopically identify most of them up to z = 1.1. Beyond this redshift, very few candidates were spectroscopically identified as SNe Ia. The current generation of super red-sensitive, fringe-free CCDs will push this redshift limit higher.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available