Added notes

notes/multiplets

@@ -0,0 +1,37 @@
+O III] 1661 and 1666 with 
+TOTL 1665. 
+
+NIII] (about 1750) 
+
+S IV] 
+
+O IV] quintuplets (both near 1400A).
+
+
+S 5,
+TOTL 2798 (Mg 2)
+TOTL 1860 (Al 3)
+TOTL 2798 (Mg 2)
+TOTL 1860 (Al 3)
+TOTL 1397 (Si IV)
+
+
+TOTL 1240 (N 5) adds up properly.
+TOTL 1035 (O 6) does as well.
+
+Yes for TOTL 1549
+No for TOTL 1397 (Si IV)
+
+
+Si IV
+
+
+TOTL 1549 = C  4 1548 + C  4  1551?
+Si IV 1394, 1403 and TOTL 1397
+
+
+
+
+
+
+

notes/notes

@@ -0,0 +1,159 @@
+immediate things
+─────────────
+trim labels in fort file header, do any other header things
+look at paper from kirk's student and find the value of that parameter
+copy grids from thor
+
+
+this shows only the transition between 1s and 2p... where are the rest of the contributions?
+
+if indeed cloudy is meaning to print these out individually?
+
+this may not be true for hydrogen-like iron, but for H-alpha the three transitions should be included
+
+is this just sloppy notation in output file, or is this really accurate and then where is all the rest of it?
+
+
+
+
+save species line "species_lines" all
+save species labels "species_labels" all
+
+
+OR
+
+save species labels "species_labels"
+H[:]
+end 
+
+
+For SED
+─────────────
+At low end transition to slope of 2
+
+at high end cutoff to slope -2.5
+
+check out Kirk's slope explanation for better approximations
+
+
+
+2017 grids needed
+
+    mehdipour SED, solar, 10²² - 10²⁴
+    magdziarz SED, solar, 10²² - 10²⁴
+    magdziarz SED, metals 0.5 & element scale factor carbon 2, 10²² - 10²⁴
+
+
+
+
+By end of March: two grids run, continuum points decided upon, models decided upon
+
+Run grid with new SED, or at least a point, check values: how to find the appropriate values to change our list accordingly, and what might need to be change?
+
+        
+
+
+
+    ✓   faint to equivalent width of 0.001 angstrom
+
+    ✓   compare between c13 and c17 -- show diferences in emergent line lists
+
+    ✓   new print lines to help reduce number of printed lines -- and to show old lines?
+
+    ✓   run models for comparising: 10.5,19.5
+
+    ✓   Why so many Fe 2 lines?
+
+    ✓   check if blnds are sums of the expected multiplets
+
+    ✓   add in more levels to the H atom, unresolved, 20, also add some to paschen, maybe others -- check how much time is lost
+
+    ✓   punch the paschen and balmer lines up to 18
+
+    ✓   Read Intrinsic Lines
+
+    □   Smoothing algorithm using n-dimensional smoothing
+
+    □   Contour plots
+
+    ✓   Run Grids in c17
+
+    ✓   Email about order of lines
+
+    ✓   Find blend correlated names and update
+
+
+
+    check on ratios of inwd lines for blends 
+
+    check hazy for RRC H  1 meaning
+
+    c  3  1175->538, seen twice? -- looked again, I don't see that now
+
+    2 TOTL lines -> He 1   
+
+    for c13 if thor open:
+
+        magziarz, 10^23, use 2000 korista and goad abundances apj, also default abundance 
+
+
+
+use notes from paper to design contour plots
+
+what is the right way to model the components? check mehdipour and magdziarz paper, and comptonization paper
+
+
+    other codes
+    ─────────────
+
+    mappings, ion, X-STAR
+
+
+include lines:
+
+8205A
+
+hapsed lines
+
+BAC 3646 ✓
+
+BAC 0 ✓
+
+Pac 0 ✓
+
+
+
+lines not found:
+
+TOTL 1.08299m
+He 1 1.08291m # 1S1 to 3P0 <
+He 1 1.08303m # 1S1 to 3P1 <
+He 1 1.08303m # 1S1 to 3P2
+He 1 3888.63A
+
+Ca2K      3934.00A
+Ca2H      3969.00A
+Ca2X      8498.00A
+Ca2Y      8542.00A
+Ca2Z      8662.00A
+
+
+
+Fe 2      1500.00A
+Fe 2      1.15000m
+Fe 2      2500.00A
+Fe 2      2300.00A
+Fe 2      8900.00A
+Fe 2      1786.00A
+Fe 3      1125.79A
+
+
+Missing blend for Ne 5  ~1142A
+
+No good matches for these, included closest ones
+
+    Si 2      1813.99A
+    Si 2      1531.00A
+    Si 2      1307.66A
+    Si 2      1263.32A
+    Si 3      1207.00A

notes/notes_for_march

@@ -0,0 +1,9 @@
+By end of March: two grids run, continuum points decided upon, models decided upon
+
+Run grid with new SED, or at least a point, check values: how to find the appropriate values to change our list accordingly, and what might need to be change?
+
+use notes from paper to design contour plots
+
+what is the right way to model the components? check mehdipour and magdziarz paper, and comptonization paper
+
+more?

notes/regarding_blends

@@ -0,0 +1,66 @@
+This regards the multiplets about which we currently obtain information from Cloudy, indexed by TOTL. Specifically, the new way these are treated in Cloudy 15.
+
+It appears C15 adds a new category of emission lines after "molecules" called "blends". It seems this has largely replaced the TOTL lines we are used to seeing, but there are some exceptions. For example, there is no longer any TOTL line around N III 1750. Here is the readout:
+
+ Inwd      860.205A    4.359    0.0033
+ N  3      1748.65A    6.367    0.3378
+ Inwd      1748.65A    6.150    0.2047
+ N  3      1753.99A    6.381    0.3489
+ Inwd      1753.99A    6.165    0.2118
+ N  3      1746.82A    5.099    0.0182
+ Inwd      1746.82A    4.866    0.0107
+ N  3      1752.16A    5.935    0.1250
+ Inwd      1752.16A    5.709    0.0742
+ N  3      1749.67A    6.719    0.7598
+ Inwd      1749.67A    6.519    0.4794
+ N  3      989.799A    6.761    0.8374
+
+Instead, presumably, there is a blend line near the relevant wavelength. listed in the blends section. Blended regions can also be accompanied by an inward component. For the N III example I found
+
+Blnd      1750.00A    7.040    1.5897
+
+In the blends section, Cloudy also outputs lines with more specific labels, often alongside similarly-located blends. For example:
+
+Blnd      1657.00A    6.418    0.3794
+C 1R      1656.00A    6.361    0.3329
+Blnd      2326.00A    5.748    0.0811
+Blnd      1335.00A    7.737    7.9093
+C 2R      1335.00A    7.690    7.1108
+C 2P      3920.00A    4.311    0.0030
+Blnd      6580.00A    5.257    0.0262
+
+My guess is these are physically-modelled multiplets displayed alongside some sort of continuum blending. I read in the "A Multiplet Table of Astrophysical Interest" about a certain type of blending, but the document is huge and I didn't delve far into it; besides, this could be another type of blend altogether, given what I know.
+
+So, I'm not sure how we might make sense of a blend line alongside the thought of the TOTL in C13 (which is that the TOTL should represent the sum of the multiplet values). In the N III example, the sum of the quintuplet's values does match the blend value. For C I, however, it does not.
+
+ C  1      1656.27A    5.388    0.0354
+ Inwd      1656.27A    5.380    0.0348
+ C  1      1656.93A    5.390    0.0356
+ Inwd      1656.93A    5.374    0.0343
+ C  1      1657.01A    5.506    0.0465
+ Inwd      1657.01A    5.520    0.0480
+ C  1      1657.38A    5.354    0.0327
+ Inwd      1657.38A    5.329    0.0310
+ C  1      1657.91A    5.390    0.0356
+ Inwd      1657.91A    5.374    0.0343
+ C  1      1658.12A    5.417    0.0379
+ Inwd      1658.12A    5.406    0.0369
+
+ (Sum = .2237)
+
+ Blnd      1657.00A    6.418    0.3794
+ C 1R      1656.00A    6.361    0.3329
+
+
+The only places I found where TOTL lines still exist are in the general properties (i.e. TOTL 4861) and the He-like iso-sequence. For example,
+
+ TOTL      29.0840A    6.811    0.9375
+ N  6      29.0840A    6.309    0.2957
+ Inwd      29.0840A    6.528    0.4886
+ N  6      29.0815A    3.848    0.0010
+ Inwd      29.0815A    4.062    0.0017
+ N  6      28.7870A    5.941    0.1266
+ Inwd      28.7870A    6.062    0.1672
+
+
+This example does not sum properly, either. So, I really have no idea what's going on, here. But, as we mostly decided before, it shouldn't matter much for our current purposes.