Paper plan

Section 1: introduction

• why model supernovae
• need RT
• various considerations: accuracy vs speed
• atomic physics vs detailed explosions models (dimensionality)
• this paper: want to compare various approximations that are made and establish how good/bad some of the common simplifying assumptions are
• nebular approximation, LTE excitation assumption, choice of atomic data, treatment of non-resonance scattering

Section 2:

• methods
• introduce "radiation field model" - J = B [LTE], J = W B [nebular approximation], J = ? [NLTE]
• introduce the code
• keep brief and to the point (refer lots to Lucy papers)
• idea of a simple but flexible and modular approach - will be public and available to build on

Section 3

• atomic input
• source of atomic data (how it's arranged/stored?)
• processes treated
• treatment of ionization: LTE, nebular ionization (detailed to follow): this paper is about excitation

Section 4:

• simple code tests
• pure Si atmosphere - compared to Synow
• pure Fe?
• other tests - parameters similar to one of the abundance tomography cases?
• Lucy 99 parameters?
  • Luminosity density is wrong
  • iteration happens with scattering rather than with downbranch or macroatom.
• convergence test, iteration information, level population results blah blah

Section 5: results

• 5.1 reference calculation

• 5.2 treatment of non-resonance scattering - macro atom vs down brach vs pure scattering (mostly a duplication of the Lucy 99 discussion except we have the full macro atom to compare too)

• 5.3 full NLTE for Si, Ca, S? [combinations thereof?] versus, LTE excitation and versus NLTE with Jblues from rad. field model. [the above is giving us for 1 model, with 1 set of atomic data: a grid of 3 x 3 sets of assumptions: [macro atom, down branch, pure scattering] x [full NLTE, NLTE+from rad. field model, LTE] ]

• do this for one model? for a couple? [e.g. W7? or pure detonation?]

• atomic data test? - Chianti versus Kurucz? Do the test for a full 3 x 3.

• do we want to do separate NLTE calculations for pure Si, Ca, etc.? Or just jump into the real models?

Section 6: conclusions

• EITHER: NLTE doesn't matter! Hurray! Don't need to worry about it in multi-D calculations.
• OR IT DOES MATTER: then should use this new code rather than previous approximate codes (minor hurray)
• [CAVEAT: what about NLTE in Fe?]