Closed andycasey closed 8 years ago
The empirical isochrones from that source seems to be only in the photometric filters (thus no Teff, log g values). Additionally, I have checked the empirical isochrones http://www.astronomy.ohio-state.edu/iso/pl.html http://www.astronomy.ohio-state.edu/iso/pl.html also doesn’t seem to work very well.
On Sep 7, 2016, at 8:35 AM, Andy Casey notifications@github.com wrote:
Assigned #26 https://github.com/AnnieJumpCannon/RAVE/issues/26 to @keithhawkins https://github.com/keithhawkins.
— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/AnnieJumpCannon/RAVE/issues/26#event-780836908, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AIDDq1R5SolMGVKUu9vKdoAhag4HmIlDks5qnq96gaJpZM4J23qV.
We are using one isochrone, then we say that the discrepancy is because isochrones don't fit young clusters. But we specifically cite one study that produces an isochrone for this cluster.
Use that one in our figures instead.