4.6 Article

The Type Ia supernova 2004s, a clone of SN 2001el, and the optimal photometric bands for extinction estimation

Journal

ASTRONOMICAL JOURNAL
Volume 133, Issue 1, Pages 58-72

Publisher

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1086/509126

Keywords

dust, extinction; supernovae : individual (SN 2004S, SN 2001el); techniques : photometric

Funding

  1. STFC [PP/D508212/1, PP/C506805/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  2. Science and Technology Facilities Council [PP/C506805/1, PP/D508212/1] Funding Source: researchfish

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We present optical (UBVRI) and near-IR (YJHK) photometry of the normal Type Ia supernova (SN) 2004S. We also present eight optical spectra and one near-IR spectrum of SN 2004S. The light curves and spectra are nearly identical to those of SN 2001el. This is the first time we have seen optical and IR light curves of two Type Ia SNe match so closely. Within the one parameter family of light curves for normal Type Ia SNe, that two objects should have such similar light curves implies that they had identical intrinsic colors and produced similar amounts of Ni-56. From the similarities of the light-curve shapes we obtain a set of extinctions as a function of wavelength that allows a simultaneous solution for the distance modulus difference of the two objects, the difference of the host galaxy extinctions, and RV. Since SN 2001el had roughly an order of magnitude more host galaxy extinction than SN 2004S, the value of R-V = 2.15(-0.22)(+0.24) pertains primarily to dust in the host galaxy of SN 2001el. We have also shown via Monte Carlo simulations that adding rest-frame J-band photometry to the complement of BVRI photometry of Type Ia SNe decreases the uncertainty in the distance modulus by a factor of 2.7. A combination of rest-frame optical and near-IR photometry clearly gives more accurate distances than using rest-frame optical photometry alone.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available