1: %\documentclass[12pt,preprint]{aastex}

2: %\documentclass[manuscript]{aastex}

3: %

4: \documentclass{emulateapj}

5: \usepackage{psfig,natbib,amsmath}

6: \newcommand{\vdag}{(v)^\dagger}

7: \def\sn{SN~2008es}

8: \def\kms{km~s$^{-1}$}

9: \def\swift{\emph{Swift}}

10: \def\arcmin{\hbox{$^\prime$}}

11: \def\arcsec{\hbox{$^{\prime\prime}$}}

12: \def\msun{M$_\odot$}

13: \def\lsun{L$_\odot$}

14: \def\rsun{R$_\odot$}

15: \def\etacar{$\eta$ Carina}

16: \def\jhk{{\em J}, {\em H}, and {\em K$_s$}}

17: \newcommand{\bvri}{\protect\hbox{$BV\!RI$}}

18: \newcommand{\citepeg}[1]{\citep[{e.g.,}][]{#1}}

19: %\newcommand{\citepeg}[1]{\citep[{e.g.,}][]{#1}}

20: \newcommand{\citepcf}[1]{\citep[{see}\phantom{}][]{#1}}

21: \shorttitle{Luminous Type II-L \sn}

22: 

23: \shortauthors{Miller et al.}

24: 

25: \begin{document}

26: 

27: \title{The Exceptionally Luminous Type II-Linear Supernova 2008es}

28: 

29: \def\berk{1}

30: \def\glast{2}

31: \def\sloan{3}

32: 

33: \author{A. A. Miller\altaffilmark{\berk}, 

34: R. Chornock\altaffilmark{\berk},   %\\

35: D. A. Perley\altaffilmark{\berk},  

36: M. Ganeshalingam\altaffilmark{\berk}, 

37: W. Li\altaffilmark{\berk},

38: N. R. Butler\altaffilmark{\berk,\glast}, % \\

39: J. S. Bloom\altaffilmark{\berk,\sloan}, 

40: N. Smith\altaffilmark{\berk},

41: M. Modjaz\altaffilmark{\berk}, 

42: D. Poznanski\altaffilmark{\berk}, % \\

43: A. V. Filippenko\altaffilmark{\berk}, 

44: C. V. Griffith\altaffilmark{\berk}, 

45: J. H. Shiode\altaffilmark{\berk}, 

46: and 

47: J. M. Silverman\altaffilmark{\berk}}

48: 

49: \altaffiltext{\berk}{Department of Astronomy, University of

50: California, Berkeley, CA 94720-3411. Email: amiller@astro.berkeley.edu}

51: \altaffiltext{\glast}{GLAST Fellow.}

52: 

53: \altaffiltext{\sloan}{Sloan Research Fellow.}

54: 

55: 

56: \begin{abstract}

57: 

58: We report on our early photometric and spectroscopic observations of

59: the extremely luminous Type II supernova (SN) 2008es. With an observed

60: peak optical magnitude of $m_V = 17.8$ and at a redshift $z = 0.213$,

61: \sn\ had a peak absolute magnitude of $M_V$ = $-22.3$, making it the

62: second most luminous SN ever observed. The photometric evolution of

63: \sn\ exhibits a fast decline rate ($\sim$0.042 mag d$^{-1}$),

64: similar to the extremely luminous Type II-L SN~2005ap.  We show that

65: \sn\ spectroscopically resembles the luminous Type II-L SN~1979C.

66: Although the spectra of \sn\ lack the narrow and intermediate-width

67: line emission typically associated with the interaction of a SN with

68: the circumstellar medium of its progenitor star, we argue that the

69: extreme luminosity of \sn\ is powered via strong interaction with a

70: dense, optically thick circumstellar medium. The integrated bolometric

71: luminosity of \sn\ yields a total radiated energy at ultraviolet and

72: optical wavelengths of $\ga$10$^{51}$ ergs.  Finally, we examine the

73: apparently anomalous rate at which the Texas Supernova Search has

74: discovered rare kinds of supernovae, including the five most luminous

75: supernovae observed to date, and find that their results are

76: consistent with those of other modern SN searches.

77: 

78: \end{abstract}

79: 

80: \keywords{supernovae: general --- supernovae: individual (\sn)}

81: 

82: \section{Introduction}

83: 

84: Wide-field synoptic optical imaging surveys are continuing to probe

85: the parameter space of time-variable phenomena with increasing depth

86: and temporal coverage

87: \citepeg{2004ApJ...611..418B,2006MNRAS.371.1681M,2008MNRAS.386..887B},

88: unveiling a variety of transients ranging from the common

89: \citep{2008ApJ...682.1205R} to the unexplained (e.g.,

90: \citealt{bdt+08}). Untargeted (``blind'') synoptic wide-field imaging

91: surveys, such as the Texas Supernova Search (TSS; \citealt{quimbyTSS})

92: conducted with the ROTSE-III 0.45-m telescope \citep{akerlof03}, have

93: uncovered a large number of rare transients, including the four most

94: luminous supernovae (SNe) observed to date: SN~2005ap

95: \citep{quimby05ap}, SN~2008am \citep{ATEL.1389}, SN~2006gy

96: \citep{ofek06gy, smith07-2006gy, smith08-2006gy}, and SN~2006tf

97: \citep{smith06tf}.  Observations of these very luminous events are

98: starting to allow the detailed physical study of the extrema in

99: core-collapse SNe. They appear to be powered in part by their

100: interaction with a highly dense circumstellar medium (CSM; see

101: \citealt{smith06tf}, and references therein), though other

102: possibilities have been advanced. Clearly, the discovery of more such

103: events would allow an exploration of the variety of the phenomenology

104: as related to the diversity of progenitors and CSM.

105: 

106: Recently, the TSS discovered yet another luminous transient on 2008

107: Apr.  26.23 (UT dates are used throughout this paper), which they

108: suggested was a variable active galactic nucleus at a redshift $z =

109: 1.02$ \citep{ATEL.1515}. \citet{ATEL.1524} then hypothesized that the

110: transient was a flare from the tidal disruption of a star by a

111: supermassive black hole. \citet{ATEL.1576} first identified \sn\ as

112: potentially an extremely luminous Type II SN (see also

113: \citealt{2008ATel.1578....1G}), and we later definitively confirmed

114: this with further spectroscopic observations \citep{ATEL.1644}; the

115: event was assigned the name \sn\ by the IAU

116: \citep{2008CBET.1462....1C}. It is located at $\alpha$ =

117: 11$^h$56$^m$49.06$^s$, $\delta$ = +54$^o$27$\arcmin$24.77$\arcsec$

118: (J2000.0).

119: 

120: Here we present our analysis of SN 2008es, which is classified as a

121: Type II-Linear (II-L) SN based on the observed linear (in mag) decline

122: in the photometric light curve \citep{barbon79,doggett85}. At $z$ =

123: 0.213, \sn\ has a peak optical magnitude of $M_V = -22.3$, among SNe

124: second only to SN~2005ap. Aside from the extreme luminosity, \sn\ is

125: of great interest since detailed ultraviolet (UV) through infrared

126: (IR) observations provide a unique opportunity to study the mass-loss

127: properties of an evolved post-main sequence massive star via its

128: interaction with the surrounding dense CSM. A similar analysis of \sn\

129: has been presented by \citet{gezari08}.

130: 

131: The outline of this paper is as follows. We present our observations

132: in $\S$2, and the photometric and spectroscopic analyses of this and

133: public (NASA) data in $\S$3 and $\S$4, respectively. A discussion is

134: given in $\S$5, and our conclusions are summarized in

135: $\S$6. Throughout this paper we adopt a concordance cosmology of $H_0$

136: = 70 \kms\ Mpc$^{-1}$, $\Omega_{\rm M} = 0.3$, and $\Omega_\Lambda =

137: 0.7$.

138: 

139: \section{Observations}

140: 

141: Here we present our ground-based optical and near-infrared (NIR)

142: photometry and optical spectroscopy, along with space-based \swift\

143: UV, optical, and X-ray observations. NIR photometry of \sn\ was

144: obtained simultaneously in \jhk\ with the Peters Automated Infrared

145: Imaging Telescope (PAIRITEL; \citealt{bloom06}) beginning 2008 May 16.

146: To improve the photometric signal-to-noise ratio (S/N), we stacked

147: images over multiple nights. For the {\em K$_s$} images the S/N of the

148: SN remained low, despite the stacks made over multiple epochs, and

149: therefore we do not include these data in our subsequent

150: analysis. Aperture photometry, using a custom pipeline, was used to

151: measure the {\em J} and {\em H} photometry of the isolated SN

152: calibrated to the 2MASS catalog (see \citealt{bloom080319b}). The

153: resulting light curves are presented in Figure~\ref{ourphot}. The

154: final PAIRITEL photometry is reported in Table~\ref{tbl-pairitel}.

155: 

156: \begin{deluxetable}{ccccr}

157: %\begin{center}

158: \tablecaption{PAIRITEL Observations of \sn\label{tbl-pairitel}}

159: \tablecolumns{5}

160: \tablewidth{3.0in}

161: %\begin{tabular}{ccccr}

162: %\tableline\tableline

163: \tablehead{\colhead{$t_{\rm mid}$\tablenotemark{a}} & \colhead{Obs.

164: window\tablenotemark{b}} & \colhead{Filter} & \colhead{Exp. time} &

165: \colhead{Mag\tablenotemark{c}} \\ 

166: \colhead{(day)} & \colhead{(day)} & & \colhead{(sec)} & }

167: \startdata

168: 4602.24 & 2.06 & J & 2895.91 & 17.74$\pm$0.03 \\

169: 4605.28 & 6.09 & J & 3869.06 & 17.68$\pm$0.03 \\

170: 4612.17 & 2.09 & J & 4606.78 & 17.68$\pm$0.02 \\

171: 4615.15 & 6.08 & J & 6458.90 & 17.68$\pm$0.02 \\

172: 4618.19 & 2.19 & J & 6129.29 & 17.77$\pm$0.03 \\

173: 4632.17 & 6.04 & J & 4944.24 & 17.75$\pm$0.04 \\

174: 4602.24 & 2.06 & H & 2880.22 & 17.62$\pm$0.06 \\

175: 4605.27 & 6.09 & H & 3751.34 & 17.43$\pm$0.06 \\

176: 4612.17 & 2.09 & H & 4598.93 & 17.59$\pm$0.06 \\

177: 4615.15 & 6.08 & H & 6451.06 & 17.40$\pm$0.04 \\

178: 4618.19 & 2.19 & H & 6074.35 & 17.53$\pm$0.05 \\

179: 4632.17 & 6.04 & H & 4865.76 & 17.89$\pm$0.11 \\

180: \enddata

181: %\end{tabular}

182: \tablecomments{PAIRITEL observations were stacked over multiple epochs to increase

183: the S/N.}

184: \tablenotetext{a}{Mid-point between the first and last exposures in a single stacked

185: image, reported as JD$-$2,450,000.}

186: \tablenotetext{b}{Time between the first and last exposures in a single stacked image.}

187: \tablenotetext{c}{Observed value; not corrected for Galactic extinction.}

188: %\end{center}

189: \end{deluxetable}

190: 

191: Optical photometry of \sn\ was obtained in \bvri\ with the Katzman

192: Automatic Imaging Telescope (KAIT; \citealt{filippenkoLOSS}) and the

193: 1-m Nickel telescope at Lick Observatory beginning 2008 May

194: 30. Point-spread function (PSF)-fitting photometry was performed on

195: the SN and several comparison stars using the {\tt IRAF/DAOPHOT}

196: package \citep{1987PASP...99..191S:stetson} and transformed into the

197: Johnson-Cousins system. Calibrations for the field were obtained with

198: the Nickel telescope on three photometric nights. The final photometry

199: from KAIT and the Nickel telescope is given in Tables~\ref{tbl-kait}

200: and~\ref{tbl-nickel}, respectively.

201: 

202: \begin{deluxetable}{cccr}

203: %\begin{center}

204: \tablecaption{KAIT Observations of \sn\label{tbl-kait}}

205: \tablecolumns{4}

206: \tablewidth{2.2in}

207: %\begin{tabular}{cccr}

208: %\tableline\tableline

209: \tablehead{\colhead{$t_{\rm obs}$\tablenotemark{a}} & \colhead{Filter} &

210: \colhead{Exp. time} & \colhead{Mag\tablenotemark{b}} \\ 

211: \colhead{(day)} & & \colhead{(sec)} & }

212: \startdata

213:       4620.72 & B & 360.00 & 18.36$\pm$0.04 \\

214:       4622.73 & B & 360.00 & 18.49$\pm$0.05 \\

215:       4624.72 & B & 360.00 & 18.60$\pm$0.04 \\

216:       4626.72 & B & 360.00 & 18.64$\pm$0.06 \\

217:       4628.72 & B & 360.00 & 18.73$\pm$0.07 \\

218:       4630.72 & B & 360.00 & 18.83$\pm$0.06 \\

219:       4632.74 & B & 360.00 & 18.93$\pm$0.09 \\

220:       4634.77 & B & 360.00 & 18.94$\pm$0.11 \\

221:       4636.73 & B & 360.00 & 19.03$\pm$0.09 \\

222:       4639.70 & B & 360.00 & 19.00$\pm$0.11 \\

223:       4643.74 & B & 360.00 & 19.46$\pm$0.09 \\

224:       4620.72 & V & 300.00 & 18.12$\pm$0.06 \\

225:       4622.73 & V & 300.00 & 18.07$\pm$0.03 \\

226:       4626.72 & V & 300.00 & 18.17$\pm$0.04 \\

227:       4628.72 & V & 300.00 & 18.22$\pm$0.04 \\

228:       4630.72 & V & 300.00 & 18.33$\pm$0.04 \\

229:       4632.74 & V & 300.00 & 18.33$\pm$0.06 \\

230:       4634.77 & V & 300.00 & 18.38$\pm$0.09 \\

231:       4636.73 & V & 300.00 & 18.55$\pm$0.03 \\

232:       4639.70 & V & 300.00 & 18.50$\pm$0.04 \\

233:       4643.74 & V & 300.00 & 18.37$\pm$0.05 \\

234:       4616.74 & R & 300.00 & 17.81$\pm$0.03 \\

235:       4618.76 & R & 300.00 & 17.85$\pm$0.04 \\

236:       4620.72 & R & 300.00 & 17.88$\pm$0.04 \\

237:       4622.73 & R & 300.00 & 17.91$\pm$0.03 \\

238:       4624.72 & R & 300.00 & 17.99$\pm$0.04 \\

239:       4626.72 & R & 300.00 & 18.00$\pm$0.03 \\

240:       4628.72 & R & 300.00 & 18.03$\pm$0.04 \\

241:       4630.72 & R & 300.00 & 18.11$\pm$0.05 \\

242:       4632.74 & R & 300.00 & 18.11$\pm$0.03 \\

243:       4634.77 & R & 300.00 & 18.20$\pm$0.04 \\

244:       4636.73 & R & 300.00 & 18.21$\pm$0.05 \\

245:       4639.70 & R & 300.00 & 18.26$\pm$0.05 \\

246:       4643.74 & R & 300.00 & 18.44$\pm$0.06 \\

247:       4616.74 & I & 300.00 & 17.74$\pm$0.07 \\

248:       4618.76 & I & 300.00 & 17.92$\pm$0.16 \\

249:       4620.72 & I & 300.00 & 17.72$\pm$0.05 \\

250:       4622.73 & I & 300.00 & 17.67$\pm$0.05 \\

251:       4624.72 & I & 300.00 & 17.81$\pm$0.05 \\

252:       4626.72 & I & 300.00 & 17.88$\pm$0.04 \\

253:       4628.72 & I & 300.00 & 17.88$\pm$0.05 \\

254:       4630.72 & I & 300.00 & 17.90$\pm$0.07 \\

255:       4632.74 & I & 300.00 & 18.01$\pm$0.06 \\

256:       4634.77 & I & 300.00 & 17.93$\pm$0.07 \\

257:       4636.73 & I & 300.00 & 18.01$\pm$0.08 \\

258:       4639.70 & I & 300.00 & 18.24$\pm$0.11 \\

259:       4643.74 & I & 300.00 & 18.20$\pm$0.09 \\

260: \enddata

261: %\end{tabular}

262: \tablenotetext{a}{Exposure mid-point, reported as JD$-$2,450,000.}

263: \tablenotetext{b}{Observed value; not corrected for Galactic extinction.}

264: %\end{center}

265: \end{deluxetable}

266: 

267: \begin{figure}[h]

268: \centerline{\psfig{file=f1.eps,width=3.5in,angle=0}}

269: %\plotone{fig1.eps}

270: \caption{Observed UV-optical-NIR light curves of \sn. The data have

271: not been corrected for Galactic or host-galaxy extinction. We include

272: ROTSE-IIIb unfiltered observations from the literature (open symbols;

273: \citealt{gezari08}), as well as our optical-NIR observations (filled

274: symbols; KAIT, Nickel, PFCam, and PAIRITEL) and space-based UVOT

275: observations from \swift\ (filled triangles). We adopt the discovery

276: date of \sn, 2008 Apr. 26.23, as ``day 0'' for this SN. Low-order

277: polynomial fits to each band have been overplotted to help guide the

278: eye.}

279: \label{ourphot}

280: \end{figure}

281: 

282: \begin{deluxetable}{cccr}

283: %\begin{center}

284: \tablecaption{Nickel Observations of \sn\label{tbl-nickel}}

285: \tablecolumns{4}

286: \tablewidth{2.2in}

287: %\begin{tabular}{cccr}

288: %\tableline\tableline

289: \tablehead{\colhead{$t_{\rm obs}$\tablenotemark{a}} & \colhead{Filter} &

290: \colhead{Exp. time} & \colhead{Mag\tablenotemark{b}} \\ 

291: \colhead{(day)} & & \colhead{(sec)} & }

292: \startdata

293:       4627.75 & B & 360.00 & 18.56$\pm$0.02 \\

294:       4635.75 & B & 360.00 & 19.04$\pm$0.07 \\

295:       4638.71 & B & 360.00 & 19.05$\pm$0.03 \\

296:       4642.67 & B & 360.00 & 19.31$\pm$0.10 \\

297:       4653.67 & B & 360.00 & 19.76$\pm$0.09 \\

298:       4655.71 & B & 360.00 & 19.76$\pm$0.04 \\

299:       4658.67 & B & 360.00 & 19.93$\pm$0.14 \\

300:       4662.67 & B & 360.00 & 20.16$\pm$0.09 \\

301:       4627.75 & V & 300.00 & 18.22$\pm$0.03 \\

302:       4635.75 & V & 300.00 & 18.45$\pm$0.04 \\

303:       4638.71 & V & 300.00 & 18.50$\pm$0.03 \\

304:       4642.67 & V & 300.00 & 18.77$\pm$0.04 \\

305:       4653.67 & V & 300.00 & 19.03$\pm$0.04 \\

306:       4655.71 & V & 300.00 & 19.12$\pm$0.04 \\

307:       4658.67 & V & 300.00 & 19.13$\pm$0.07 \\

308:       4662.67 & V & 300.00 & 19.53$\pm$0.15 \\

309:       4627.75 & R & 300.00 & 18.01$\pm$0.02 \\

310:       4635.75 & R & 300.00 & 18.19$\pm$0.04 \\

311:       4638.71 & R & 300.00 & 18.25$\pm$0.03 \\

312:       4642.67 & R & 300.00 & 18.53$\pm$0.12 \\

313:       4653.67 & R & 300.00 & 18.62$\pm$0.04 \\

314:       4655.71 & R & 300.00 & 18.73$\pm$0.03 \\

315:       4658.67 & R & 300.00 & 18.84$\pm$0.11 \\

316:       4662.67 & R & 300.00 & 19.08$\pm$0.05 \\

317:       4627.75 & I & 300.00 & 17.79$\pm$0.04 \\

318:       4635.75 & I & 300.00 & 17.86$\pm$0.09 \\

319:       4638.71 & I & 300.00 & 18.04$\pm$0.04 \\

320:       4642.67 & I & 300.00 & 18.04$\pm$0.08 \\

321:       4653.67 & I & 300.00 & 18.34$\pm$0.11 \\

322:       4655.71 & I & 300.00 & 18.42$\pm$0.07 \\

323:       4658.67 & I & 300.00 & 18.29$\pm$0.17 \\

324:       4662.67 & I & 300.00 & 18.16$\pm$0.13 \\

325: \enddata

326: %\end{tabular}

327: \tablenotetext{a}{Exposure mid-point, reported as JD$-$2,450,000.}

328: \tablenotetext{b}{Observed value; not corrected for Galactic extinction.}

329: %\end{center}

330: \end{deluxetable}

331: 

332: Additional optical photometry was obtained in $U$\bvri\ on 2008 June

333: 02 and \bvri\ on 2008 Aug. 05 with PFCam on the 3-m Shane telescope at

334: Lick Observatory. The data were reduced using standard techniques and

335: aperture photometry was used to extract the SN flux. \bvri\

336: calibrations were done using the same stars as those used for the

337: Nickel and KAIT observations. Calibrations for the $U$ band were not

338: obtained with the Nickel telescope. Therefore, we convert the 

339: Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS) colors of stars in the field to the 

340: $U$ band with the color

341: transformations of \citet{jester2005}, and use these stars for our

342: $U$-band calibration. The final PFCam photometry is reported in

343: Table~\ref{tbl-pfcam}.

344: 

345: \begin{deluxetable}{cccr}

346: %\begin{center}

347: \tablecaption{PFCam Observations of \sn\label{tbl-pfcam}}

348: \tablecolumns{4}

349: \tablewidth{2.2in}

350: %\begin{tabular}{cccr}

351: %\tableline\tableline

352: \tablehead{\colhead{$t_{\rm obs}$\tablenotemark{a}} & \colhead{Filter} &

353: \colhead{Exp. time} & \colhead{Mag\tablenotemark{b}} \\ 

354: \colhead{(day)} & & \colhead{(sec)} & }

355: \startdata

356:       4619.81 & U & 1230.00 & 17.73$\pm$0.07 \\

357:       4619.83 & B & 630.00 & 18.16$\pm$0.01 \\

358:       4683.70 & B & 360.00 & 21.39$\pm$0.15 \\

359:       4619.83 & V & 930.00 & 17.86$\pm$0.01 \\

360:       4683.71 & V & 360.00 & 20.19$\pm$0.05 \\

361:       4619.79 & R & 930.00 & 17.77$\pm$0.01 \\

362:       4683.68 & R & 600.00 & 19.67$\pm$0.04 \\

363:       4619.85 & I & 1230.00 & 17.63$\pm$0.01 \\

364:       4683.70 & I & 360.00 & 19.28$\pm$0.03 \\

365: \enddata

366: %\end{tabular}

367: \tablenotetext{a}{Exposure mid-point, reported as JD-2450000.}

368: \tablenotetext{b}{Observed value; not corrected for Galactic extinction.}

369: %\end{center}

370: \end{deluxetable}

371: 

372: The \swift\ satellite observed \sn\ during 13 epochs between 2008 May

373: 14 and Aug. 21.  We downloaded the Ultraviolet/Optical Telescope

374: (UVOT; \citealt{roming05}) data from the \swift\ data archive and

375: analyzed the Level 2 sky image data in $U$, $B$, and $V$ according to

376: the photometry calibration and recipe by \citet{li06}.  The \swift\ UV

377: filters ($UVW1$, $UVM1$, and $UVW2$) were reduced following

378: \citet{poole2008}.  The final \swift\ UVOT photometry is reported in

379: Table~\ref{tbl-uvot}.

380: 

381: \begin{deluxetable}{cccr}

382: \tabletypesize{\small}

383: \tablecaption{UVOT Observations of \sn}

384: \tablecolumns{4}

385: \tablewidth{2.2in}

386: \tablehead{\colhead{$t_{\rm obs}$\tablenotemark{a}} & \colhead{Filter} &

387: \colhead{Exp. time} & \colhead{Mag\tablenotemark{b}} \\ 

388: \colhead{(day)} & \colhead{} & \colhead{(sec)} & \colhead{}}

389: \startdata

390:       4600.75 & UVW2 & 1585.70 & 17.02$\pm$0.02 \\

391:       4602.25 & UVW2 & 1802.20 & 17.06$\pm$0.02 \\

392:       4610.00 & UVW2 & 2119.30 & 17.64$\pm$0.03 \\

393:       4617.50 & UVW2 & 542.40 & 18.21$\pm$0.07 \\

394:       4618.75 & UVW2 & 1731.10 & 18.29$\pm$0.04 \\

395:       4624.75 & UVW2 & 487.70 & 18.73$\pm$0.09 \\

396:       4635.50 & UVW2 & 1664.50 & 19.68$\pm$0.08 \\

397:       4644.25 & UVW2 & 1593.40 & 20.28$\pm$0.12 \\

398:       4652.25 & UVW2 & 1317.80 & 20.42$\pm$0.15 \\

399:       4665.50 & UVW2 & 1765.70 & 21.04$\pm$0.19 \\

400:       4600.75 & UVM2 & 1043.20 & 16.78$\pm$0.03 \\

401:       4602.25 & UVM2 & 1148.40 & 16.87$\pm$0.03 \\

402:       4610.00 & UVM2 & 1523.60 & 17.43$\pm$0.04 \\

403:       4617.50 & UVM2 & 338.60 & 18.05$\pm$0.10 \\

404:       4618.75 & UVM2 & 1110.60 & 17.97$\pm$0.06 \\

405:       4624.75 & UVM2 & 150.30 & 18.58$\pm$0.20 \\

406:       4635.75 & UVM2 & 1149.50 & 19.61$\pm$0.12 \\

407:       4644.25 & UVM2 & 1081.80 & 19.59$\pm$0.13 \\

408:       4652.25 & UVM2 & 938.10 & 20.28$\pm$0.20 \\

409:       4665.75 & UVM2 & 1071.50 & 20.63$\pm$0.22 \\

410:       4600.75 & UVW1 & 792.40 & 16.78$\pm$0.03 \\

411:       4602.25 & UVW1 & 900.70 & 16.85$\pm$0.03 \\

412:       4610.00 & UVW1 & 1058.30 & 17.27$\pm$0.03 \\

413:       4617.50 & UVW1 & 270.70 & 17.86$\pm$0.08 \\

414:       4618.75 & UVW1 & 865.10 & 17.80$\pm$0.05 \\

415:       4624.75 & UVW1 & 243.70 & 18.16$\pm$0.10 \\

416:       4635.50 & UVW1 & 831.80 & 18.94$\pm$0.08 \\

417:       4644.25 & UVW1 & 796.10 & 19.90$\pm$0.15 \\

418:       4652.25 & UVW1 & 790.00 & 20.37$\pm$0.23 \\

419:       4665.50 & UVW1 & 1048.30 & 21.10$\pm$0.36 \\

420:       4600.75 & U & 395.80 & 16.80$\pm$0.03 \\

421:       4602.25 & U & 449.90 & 16.83$\pm$0.03 \\

422:       4609.75 & U & 399.60 & 17.07$\pm$0.03 \\

423:       4617.50 & U & 134.90 & 17.50$\pm$0.07 \\

424:       4618.75 & U & 431.90 & 17.46$\pm$0.04 \\

425:       4624.75 & U & 121.50 & 18.07$\pm$0.09 \\

426:       4635.50 & U & 415.40 & 18.52$\pm$0.06 \\

427:       4644.25 & U & 397.40 & 19.03$\pm$0.09 \\

428:       4652.25 & U & 386.70 & 19.23$\pm$0.10 \\

429:       4665.50 & U & 523.60 & 20.05$\pm$0.17 \\

430:       4600.75 & B & 395.80 & 17.76$\pm$0.03 \\

431:       4602.25 & B & 449.90 & 17.75$\pm$0.03 \\

432:       4610.00 & B & 527.80 & 17.95$\pm$0.03 \\

433:       4617.50 & B & 135.00 & 18.18$\pm$0.08 \\

434:       4618.75 & B & 431.90 & 18.15$\pm$0.04 \\

435:       4624.75 & B & 121.60 & 18.41$\pm$0.08 \\

436:       4635.50 & B & 415.40 & 19.08$\pm$0.06 \\

437:       4644.25 & B & 397.50 & 19.19$\pm$0.08 \\

438:       4652.25 & B & 328.60 & 19.96$\pm$0.14 \\

439:       4665.50 & B & 523.70 & 19.93$\pm$0.11 \\

440:       4699.75 & B & 4150.20 & 21.36$\pm$0.12 \\

441:       4600.75 & V & 395.70 & 17.67$\pm$0.06 \\

442:       4602.25 & V & 449.90 & 17.58$\pm$0.05 \\

443:       4609.75 & V & 399.50 & 17.80$\pm$0.06 \\

444:       4617.50 & V & 134.90 & 17.85$\pm$0.11 \\

445:       4618.75 & V & 432.00 & 17.84$\pm$0.06 \\

446:       4624.75 & V & 81.00 & 17.84$\pm$0.14 \\

447:       4635.75 & V & 415.40 & 18.41$\pm$0.08 \\

448:       4644.25 & V & 397.60 & 18.52$\pm$0.09 \\

449:       4652.25 & V & 328.50 & 19.16$\pm$0.15 \\

450:       4665.75 & V & 398.90 & 19.12$\pm$0.13 \\

451:       4682.22 & V & 1876.40 & 20.11$\pm$0.13 \\

452:       4697.25 & V & 4316.10 & 20.23$\pm$0.09 \\

453: \enddata

454: \tablenotetext{a}{Exposure mid-point, reported as JD$-$2,450,000.}

455: \tablenotetext{b}{Observed value; not corrected for Galactic extinction.}

456: \label{tbl-uvot}

457: \end{deluxetable}

458: 

459: Simultaneous observations of \sn\ occurred with the \swift\ X-ray

460: Telescope (XRT; \citealt{burrows05}), for which we confirm a

461: nondetection of X-ray emission (see also \citealt{ATEL.1524}). To

462: place a limit on the source flux we assume a power-law spectrum with a

463: photon index $\Gamma = 2$, absorbed by elements associated with

464: Galactic \ion{H}{1}. We took an extraction region of radius 64 pixels

465: ($\sim$2.5$\arcmin$) and fit the PSF model around the centroid of the

466: optical emission. We obtain a 3$\sigma$ limiting flux of $9 \times

467: 10^{-15}$ erg~cm$^{-2}$~s$^{-1}$ in the 0.3--10 keV band for a total

468: exposure of 54.7 ks.  This represents an upper limit to the X-ray

469: luminosity of \sn\ of $\sim 1.2 \times 10^{42}$ ergs~s$^{-1}$.

470: 

471: We obtained spectra of \sn\ on 2008 May 16.3, 2008 May 29.3, and 2008

472: July 7.3 using the Kast spectrograph on the Lick 3-m telescope

473: \citep{kastref}. Additional spectra were obtained on 2008 June 7.4 and

474: 2008 Aug. 3.3 using the Low Resolution Imaging Spectrometer on the

475: Keck I 10-m telescope \citep{oke95} and on 2008 June 21.2 and 2008

476: June 23.2 using the R.\ C.\ Spectrograph on the Kitt Peak 4-m

477: telescope, following the approval of our request for Kitt Peak

478: Director's Discretionary Time. The spectra were extracted and

479: calibrated following standard procedures (e.g., \citealt{matheson00}).

480: Clouds were present during several of the observations, making the

481: absolute flux scales unreliable.  The spectrograph slit was placed at

482: the parallactic angle, so the relative spectral shapes should be

483: accurate \citep{fil82}, with the exception of the Kitt Peak spectra,

484: which have a small amount of second-order light contamination at

485: wavelengths longward of $\sim$8000~\AA.  The full \sn\ spectral

486: sequence is plotted in Figure~\ref{specevo}.  The two Kitt Peak

487: spectra show little evolution in the two days that separate them and

488: have been combined to increase the S/N (day 33 in

489: Figure~\ref{specevo}).  A log of our spectroscopic observations is

490: presented in Table~\ref{specobstab}.

491: 

492: \begin{figure}

493: \centerline{\psfig{file=f2.eps,width=3.5in,angle=0}}

494: %\plotone{fig2.eps}

495: \caption{Spectral evolution of \sn. Spectra of \sn\ (in color) are

496: labeled with their ages in the rest frame of the supernova ($z =

497: 0.213$) relative to the observed $V$-band maximum on May 13.3.  The

498: spectra become progressively redder as the SN ages and broad P-Cygni

499: spectral features become more prominent with time.  By +68~d, a broad

500: emission feature of H$\alpha$ is clearly present.  The top spectrum

501: (in black) is the earliest spectrum of SN~2005ap, the most luminous

502: observed SN \citep{quimby05ap}.}

503: \label{specevo}

504: \end{figure}

505: 

506: \begin{deluxetable*}{lccccccc}

507: \tablecaption{Log of Spectroscopic Observations}

508: \tablewidth{0pt}

509: \tablehead{\colhead{Age\tablenotemark{a}} & \colhead{UT Date} &

510: \colhead{Instrument\tablenotemark{b}} &

511: \colhead{Range} & \colhead{Exp. Time} & \colhead{Seeing} &

512: \colhead{Airmass} & \colhead{Photometric?} \\

513: \colhead{(days)} &  &  & \colhead{(\AA)}

514:   & \colhead{(s)} & \colhead{(\arcsec)} &  & \colhead{(y/n)} }

515: \startdata

516: 3 & 2008-05-16.345 & Kast & 3300--8830 &  1500 & 2.4 & 1.3 & y \\

517: 13 & 2008-05-29.253 & Kast & 3300--8820 & 1800 & 2.3 & 1.1 & n \\

518: 21 & 2008-06-07.399 & LRIS & 3200--9230 & 1200 & 1.6 & 2.0 & y \\

519: 33 & 2008-06-21.194 & RC & 4200--9280 & 1800 & 2.9 & 1.3 & y \\

520: 34 & 2008-06-23.189 & RC & 4200--9280 & 2400 & 1.8 & 1.3 & y \\

521: 45 & 2008-07-07.252 & Kast & 3300--9280 & 4200 & 2.5 & 1.6 & y \\

522: 68 & 2008-08-03.254 & LRIS & 3500--9190 & 877 & 0.9 & 2.0 & n \\

523: \enddata

524: \tablenotetext{a}{Age in rest-frame days relative to the observed

525:   $V$-band maximum on 2008 May 13.3.}

526: \tablenotetext{b}{Kast = Kast spectrograph on Lick 3-m telescope. LRIS

527:   = Low Resolution Imaging Spectrometer on Keck-I 10-m telescope.  RC

528:   = R.\ C.\ Spectrograph on Kitt Peak 4-m telescope.}

529: \label{specobstab}

530: \end{deluxetable*}

531: 

532: We searched our spectra for the possible presence of narrow lines and

533: were unable to positively identify any, either in emission or

534: absorption. Therefore, without a detection of the host galaxy, we

535: determine the redshift of \sn\ directly from the SN spectrum. As the

536: SN aged, broad P-Cygni spectral features appeared, including an

537: emission feature near 7900~\AA\ that we identify as H$\alpha$ near a

538: redshift of 0.2.  Other spectral features are consistent with a Type

539: II SN at about that redshift.

540: 

541: To get a more accurate redshift, we identified two similar reference

542: spectra of the Type II-L SNe 1979C and 1980K from the literature

543: \citep{branch81,uomoto86}.  These spectral comparisons are shown in

544: the bottom panel of Figure~\ref{speccomp}.  We used the SuperNova

545: IDentification code of \citet{snid07} to cross-correlate the day 68

546: spectrum of \sn\ with the two reference spectra and derived a

547: weighted-average $z = 0.213 \pm 0.006$, which we adopt throughout this

548: paper.  This redshift agrees with a fit to the broad H$\alpha$

549: emission line in the day 68 spectrum, which yields a flux centroid of

550: $z = 0.210$.  The \sn\ redshift determined using this method is

551: correlated with the expansion velocity, but we assume that the bias

552: due to this effect is small given that all three SNe have H$\alpha$

553: emission lines of a similar width at late times.

554: 

555: \begin{figure}

556: \centerline{\psfig{file=f3.eps,width=3.5in,angle=0}}

557: %\plotone{fig3.eps}

558: \caption{Spectral comparisons of \sn\ to two SNe II-L.  All spectra

559: are labeled with their respective ages in rest-frame days relative to

560: maximum light, and prominent spectral features are identified.  The

561: zero point of the flux scale is accurate for the \sn\ spectra (in

562: blue), while the comparison spectra (in black) are vertically offset.

563: The top panel shows a comparison at an early epoch of \sn\ to SN~1979C

564: from 1979 Apr. 28 \citep{branch81}.  The bottom panel shows a

565: comparison at a later epoch to SN~1979C from 1979 May 28

566: \citep{branch81} and SN~1980K (spectra from 1980 Nov. 15 and 17

567: combined; \citealt{uomoto86}).  Telluric absorption bands in the SNe

568: 1979C and 1980K spectra are marked with a $\earth$ symbol.}

569: \label{speccomp}

570: \end{figure}

571: 

572: \section{Photometric Results}

573: 

574: Our dataset provides excellent broad-band coverage of \sn\ from the UV

575: to the NIR, which allows us to model changes in the spectral energy

576: distribution (SED). In order to sample each photometric band onto a

577: single set of common epochs, we fit low-order polynomials to each

578: light curve, which we then interpolate onto a common grid. NIR

579: observations were only included on or around epochs where we detected

580: the SN.

581: 

582: We create an SED at each of the common epochs and fit a

583: single-component blackbody (BB) to the data following the procedure

584: described by \citet{modjaz08d}. Prior to the SED/BB fits we add a

585: systematic term to the uncertainty in the photometric measurement in

586: each band. This term is added in quadrature to the statistical

587: uncertainty, and for the NIR ({\em JH}) is equal to 2\%, in the

588: optical (\bvri) we adopt 3\%, while for $U$ band we adopt 10\%, and

589: the adopted UV ($UVW1$, $UVM2$, $UVW2$) systematic uncertainty is

590: 20\%. Across all epochs of the BB fits the total $\chi^2$ per degree

591: of freedom is $45.6/65$, which suggests that our systematic terms may

592: be slightly overestimated.  We assume no host-galaxy extinction (for

593: further details see $\S$5), and correct our measurements for the

594: modest amount of Galactic reddening $E(B-V)$ = 0.011 mag

595: \citep{schlegel98}. From the SED/BB fits we derive the temperature,

596: radius, and luminosity of the SN as a function of time, as shown in

597: Figure~\ref{bol_lum}.  The temperature and luminosity decrease while

598: the radius increases with time, as expected for an expanding and

599: cooling SN photosphere.

600: 

601: \begin{figure}

602: \centerline{\psfig{file=f4.eps,width=3.5in,angle=0}}

603: %\plotone{fig4.eps}

604: \caption{Photospheric and bolometric luminosity evolution of \sn. Top:

605: temperature evolution of \sn\ based on BB fits (open circles) and

606: inferred radius (open triangles).  The error bars on the radius are

607: likely to be slightly overestimated because the errors on the BB

608: temperature and luminosity are correlated.  Bottom: bolometric

609: luminosity of \sn\ derived via two independent methods, BB modeling

610: (closed squares) and integration of the total UV+optical (+NIR where

611: available) flux (open diamonds). The two methods agree to within $\la$

612: 20\%.}

613: \label{bol_lum}

614: \end{figure}

615: 

616: In order to determine the time of $V$-band maximum light, which at the

617: redshift of this SN roughly corresponds to rest-frame $B$, we convert

618: the early time $g$, $r$, and $i'$ photometry taken with the Palomar

619: 1.5-m telescope from \citet{gezari08} to $VRI$ using the color

620: equations from \citet{jester2005}. Following a quadratic fit to these

621: data, we find that the observed $V$-band maximum occurred on

622: $\sim$2008 May 13, $\sim$15 rest-frame days after discovery. The

623: observed peak is $V$ = 17.8 mag, which corresponds to $M_V$ = $-22.3$

624: mag, with a scatter about our fit of 0.04 mag.

625: 

626: In Figure~\ref{SED} we show two representative fits to the SED of

627: \sn\, at 26.6 and 65.4 rest-frame days after discovery. In all epochs

628: we observe excess emission relative to a single BB in the bluest of

629: the \swift\ filters, $UVW2$, while starting around 55 rest-frame days

630: after discovery there is excess emission in both $UVW2$ and

631: $UVM2$. This excess was also observed in the Type II-Plateau (II-P)

632: SN~2006bp, where it was attributed to complex line blanketing by

633: Fe-peak elements \citep{immler07}.  The blue excess is readily

634: identified in the UV color curves (e.g., $UVW2$--$UVW1$) of \sn, which

635: evolve toward the red until $\sim$50 rest-frame days after discovery,

636: at which point the $UVW2$--$UVW1$ and $UVM2$--$UVW1$ colors become

637: progressively more and more blue.  These points were excluded from our

638: SED/BB fits. To confirm that we were not underestimating the

639: bolometric luminosity of the SN, we directly integrated the flux in

640: the SED using the same method as \citet{modjaz08d}. We show the

641: results of this direct integration in the lower panel of

642: Figure~\ref{bol_lum}, and in all cases we find that the BB model and

643: direct integration method agree to within $\la$20\%.

644: 

645: \begin{figure}

646: \centerline{\psfig{file=f5.eps,width=3.5in,angle=0}}

647: %\plotone{fig5.eps}

648: \caption{SEDs from \sn\ corrected for Galactic extinction. We show two

649: representative SEDs of \sn\ at $\sim$27 and $\sim$65 rest-frame days

650: after discovery. The SEDs are well fit by a single BB component. Note

651: that relative to the model BB there is excess flux in the $UVW2$ band

652: in both epochs, while the $UVM2$ band shows excess in the later

653: epoch. All UV measurements that exhibit a clear excess relative to a

654: BB are shown in gray and are excluded from the fits.}

655: \label{SED}

656: \end{figure}

657: 

658: The observed linear decline in the light curve of \sn\ leads us to

659: classify it as a Type II-L SN.  We measure a bolometric photometric

660: decay rate of 0.042 mag d$^{-1}$, which is slightly faster than the

661: $V$-band (roughly rest-frame $B$) rate of 0.036 mag d$^{-1}$. This

662: rate is also slightly slower than the rest-frame $B$-band decay of

663: both SN~1979C (0.046 mag d$^{-1}$; \citealt{panagia1980}) and SN~1980K

664: (0.055 mag d$^{-1}$; \citealt{barbon82}).  Furthermore, integrating

665: the bolometric light curve from 15 to 83 rest-frame days after

666: discovery yields a total radiated energy of $\sim$9 $\times 10^{50}$

667: ergs, comparable to the canonical 10$^{51}$ ergs deposited into the

668: kinetic energy of a SN. If we assume the same bolometric correction

669: factor to the observed $V$-band light curve both pre- and

670: post-maximum, and we include the early data from \citet{gezari08}, we

671: find the total radiated energy of \sn\ over the first 83~d after

672: discovery is $\sim$1.1 $\times 10^{51}$ ergs.

673: 

674: The three \swift\ UVOT observations taken more than 80~d after the

675: discovery of \sn\ show tentative evidence for a significant reduction

676: in the SN photometric decline rate (see Figure~\ref{ourphot}). We

677: note, however, that the late-time UVOT measurements have significant

678: errors, and these observations may be consistent with the early trend

679: seen in the light curve. \citet{gezari08} suggested that these

680: observations were evidence that the SN luminosity made a transition to

681: being powered by radioactive heating from $^{56}$Co. With only two

682: observations of this decline, we caution against prematurely

683: identifying the $^{56}$Co decay tail, and instead argue that the

684: observations are inconclusive at this time. For instance, it would be

685: possible to mimic the behavior of $^{56}$Co decay with a late-time

686: light echo, or interaction with an extended CSM. We note that

687: SN~2006gy also showed evidence for a ``flattening'' several months

688: after explosion \citep{smith07-2006gy}, but further observations taken

689: the following year indicated that this was not clearly the $^{56}$Co

690: tail \citep{smith08-2006gy}.  Our last optical spectrum

691: (Fig.~\ref{specevo}) also shows no evidence that the ejecta were

692: becoming optically thin on that date, as would be expected if \sn\

693: were transitioning to the radioactive decay tail.  Late-time

694: photometry will be necessary to conclusively identify if and when the

695: light curve of \sn\ made a transition to being powered by $^{56}$Co

696: decay, and thus allow a measurement of the amount of $^{56}$Ni

697: synthesized in the explosion.

698: 

699: \section{Spectroscopy}

700: 

701: The \sn\ spectral sequence plotted in Figure~\ref{specevo} is labeled

702: with ages (in the rest frame) relative to the observed $V$-band

703: maximum in order to facilitate comparison with SNe 1979C and 1980K in

704: Figure~\ref{speccomp}.  Our first two spectra of \sn\ (at $+3$ and

705: $+13$ d relative to maximum light) show a smooth and featureless blue

706: continuum with no identifiable spectral features.  In particular, we

707: do not detect an emission feature near 5650~\AA\ (4660~\AA\ in the

708: rest frame) seen in earlier spectra of \sn\ taken between 2008 May 1

709: and 2008 May 8 \citep{ATEL.1515, gezari08}. \citet{gezari08}

710: attribute this feature solely to \ion{He}{2} $\lambda$4686, but we

711: note that transient emission features seen in the early spectra of

712: some SNe~IIn at similar wavelengths are due to a combination of

713: \ion{He}{2} $\lambda$4686 and the Wolf-Rayet \ion{C}{3}/\ion{N}{3}

714: $\lambda$4640 blend \citep{niemela85,leonard00}.

715: 

716: In addition, the spectrum of the extremely luminous SN~2005ap from

717: $-3$ d is shown at the top of Figure~\ref{specevo}.  The SN~2005ap

718: spectrum is also very blue, but has additional spectral features that

719: are not seen in our \sn\ spectrum from a similar

720: epoch. \citet{quimby05ap} identified the strongest spectral feature in

721: SN~2005ap, the ``W''-shaped feature near 4200~\AA, as being due to a

722: blend of \ion{C}{3}, \ion{N}{3}, and \ion{O}{3} with an expansion

723: velocity of about 20,000 \kms.

724: 

725: Our next spectrum, at $+$21 d, is noticeably redder and is the first

726: to show strong spectral features.  Both SN~1979C at a similar epoch

727: and \sn\ show a blue continuum with weak, low-contrast lines of H and

728: \ion{He}{1} lines present mostly in absorption (Fig.~\ref{speccomp}).

729: However, H$\alpha$ is present only in emission and is weak in \sn.

730: The H$\alpha$ line in \sn\ has a full width at half-maximum intensity

731: (FWHM) of 10,000 \kms\ and an equivalent width of only 22 \AA.  (Both

732: of these values have large uncertainties due to difficulties in

733: defining the continuum for a line with such a low amplitude.)  One

734: difference between the two objects is the lower apparent velocities in

735: \sn.  The H$\beta$ and \ion{He}{1} $\lambda$5876 lines of SN~1979C

736: have absorption minima at velocities of 9700 and 8900 \kms.  In \sn,

737: these values are 6000 and 5700 \kms, respectively, although we caution

738: that the exact values are correlated with the assumed value for the

739: redshift.

740: 

741: Over the next two months, the spectra of \sn\ plotted in

742: Figure~\ref{specevo} became redder, reflecting the cooling

743: photospheric temperature evolution discussed above. In addition, the

744: spectral features first seen in the day +21 spectrum gradually became

745: more prominent.  The SN features are still muted in amplitude relative

746: to those expected in a normal Type II SN.  This may be an example of

747: the ``top-lighting'' effect described by \citet{branch00}, where

748: continuum emission from interaction with CSM illuminates the SN ejecta

749: from above and results in a rescaling of the amplitudes of spectral

750: features.

751: 

752: By the time of our day +68 spectrum, the P-Cygni spectral features due

753: to H Balmer lines, \ion{Na}{1}, and \ion{Fe}{2} become more prominent

754: and the overall appearance starts to resemble that of normal SNe II.

755: The H$\alpha$ profile lacks an absorption component, which may be

756: common to SNe II-L and not SNe II-P (e.g., \citealt{schlegel96},

757: \citealt{fil97}).  The broad H$\alpha$ emission extends (at

758: zero intensity) from $-9000$ to 9000 \kms, with a FWHM of 9500 \kms.

759: This velocity width is intermediate between that of the SNe~1979C and

760: 1980K spectra (FWHM $\approx$ 10,600 and $\approx$ 8200 \kms,

761: respectively).

762: 

763: Unlike in most core-collapse SNe, the velocity of the minimum of the

764: H$\beta$ line {\it increased} over time, from 6000 \kms\ at day 21, to

765: 8700 \kms\ at day 68, as shown in the bottom panel of

766: Figure~\ref{velplot}.  The exact values of the velocity depend

767: directly on the assumed redshift, but the {\it trend} is

768: independent of those uncertainties.  Unfortunately, the other

769: absorption lines are mostly blended (except for H$\alpha$, which does

770: not show an absorption component), so we cannot isolate the velocity

771: trend in other spectral features without spectral modeling.  The top

772: panel of Figure~\ref{velplot} shows the evolution of the \ion{He}{1}

773: $\lambda$5876/\ion{Na}{1} $\lambda$5892 blend.  At early times

774: \ion{He}{1} dominates the blend, and as the ejecta cool at later

775: epochs \ion{Na}{1} should dominate, resulting in an $\sim$800 \kms\

776: redward shift of the rest wavelength.  After taking into account that

777: redward shift, the top panel of Figure~\ref{velplot} also shows some

778: weak evidence for a blueward shift of the absorption minimum to

779: $\sim$8000 \kms.

780: 

781: The only supernova known to us to show increasing absorption

782: velocities over time is the peculiar SN~Ib~2005bf. The trend of

783: increasing absorption velocities was only visible in the three He~I

784: lines, but not in other lines such as Ca~II H\&K

785: \citep{modjaz07_thesis}.  \citet{tominaga05bf} explained the effect as

786: being due to progressive outward excitation of \ion{He}{1} by

787: radioactive $^{56}$Ni in the interior as the ejecta expanded and the

788: density decreased, an effect that seems to be of little relevance to

789: \sn.  A more likely possibility is that blending with some

790: unidentified line is shifting the velocity of the apparent absorption

791: minimum.  At late times H$\beta$ dominates its region of the spectrum,

792: but at early times \ion{He}{2} $\lambda$4686 could possibly be

793: contributing emission to the blue wing of the H$\beta$ absorption

794: profile.  Another scenario is that some unusual, but as yet

795: unidentified, radiative transfer effect is affecting the wavelength of

796: the apparent absorption minimum in \sn.  For example, if the optical

797: depth in an optically thick line increases sufficiently rapidly with

798: time (e.g., as the ejecta cool and recombine), then the apparent

799: absorption minimum could move blueward \citep{jb90}.  None of these

800: suggestions explain why such an effect would be present only in \sn\

801: and not in normal SNe.

802: 

803: \begin{figure}

804: \centerline{\psfig{file=f6.eps,width=3.5in,angle=0}}

805: %\plotone{fig6.eps}

806: \caption{Velocity evolution of absorption minima.  The spectra are

807: labeled with dates after maximum light in the same manner as in

808: Figure~\ref{specevo}. In the bottom panel the apparent blueshift of

809: the H$\beta$ absorption minimum increases over time.  A vertical

810: dashed line at $-$6000 \kms\ marks the velocity of the absorption

811: minimum on day 21 to guide the eye.  In the top panel, the evolution

812: of the \ion{He}{1} $\lambda$5876/\ion{Na}{1} $\lambda$5892 blend is

813: plotted, with $\lambda$5876 used as the zero point of the velocity

814: scale.  The vertical dashed line at $-$5700 \kms\ marks the absorption

815: minimum on day 21 to guide the eye.}

816: \label{velplot}

817: \end{figure} 

818: 

819: \section{Discussion}

820: 

821: \subsection{The Physical Nature of \sn}

822: 

823: The photometric evolution of \sn\ (see Fig.~\ref{photcomp}) is much

824: faster than that of other very luminous SNe like SNe~2006gy

825: \citep{smith07-2006gy, ofek06gy}, 2006tf \citep{smith06tf}, and 2005gj

826: \citep{prieto05gj}, and its spectrum also betrays no evidence for the

827: strong CSM interaction seen in these other SNe~IIn, in the form of

828: narrow lines from the CSM or intermediate-width H$\alpha$ from the

829: post-shock shell.  Indeed, considering both its photometric and

830: spectroscopic evolution, we suggest that \sn\ is most like the

831: overluminous SN~2005ap \citep{quimby05ap} and thereby most closely

832: resembles a Type II-L that is 4--5 mag more luminous than typical

833: SNe~II-L \citep{richardson02}.

834: 

835: \begin{figure}

836: \centerline{\psfig{file=f7.eps,width=3.5in,angle=0}}

837: %\plotone{fig7.eps}

838: \caption{Rest-frame brightness evolution of five of the most luminous

839: known SNe. For SN~2008es we derive the absolute magnitude using UVOT 

840: and the KAIT/Nickel $V$-band magnitudes (filled green squares) and the 

841: KAIT/Nickel $R$-band

842: magnitudes (red squares), assuming that day 0 is the discovery date. 

843: Early $g$-band photometry from \citet{gezari08}, converted to 

844: $V$-band using the color equations of \citet{jester2005}, is also shown 

845: (open green squares).  The light curve for SN~2005ap (orange) is derived from

846: unfiltered photometry in \citet{quimby05ap}, and SN~2006gy (gray

847: circles) is also unfiltered from \citet{smith07-2006gy}.  $R$-band

848: photometry of SN~2006tf (blue circles) is from \citet{smith06tf}, and

849: $r$/$r'$ photometry of SN~2005gj (dotted line) is from

850: \citet{prieto05gj}. The light curve for SN~2006tf is shifted by +16~d 

851: from that in \citet{smith06tf}; since the explosion date is not

852: known, we chose to align its time of peak luminosity with those of

853: SNe~2005ap and 2008es.}

854: \label{photcomp}

855: \end{figure}

856: 

857: To power the tremendous luminosity of \sn\ with radioactive decay

858: would require an initial $^{56}$Ni mass of $\sim$10 M$_{\odot}$ (see,

859: e.g., \citealt{smith07-2006gy}).  This $^{56}$Ni mass would very

860: likely need to be generated in a pair-instability explosion

861: (\citealt{barkat67,bond84}), but this $^{56}$Ni mass seems problematic

862: given that it would be larger than the modest envelope mass indicated

863: by the relatively fast rise and decay time (see below).  In addition,

864: the photometric decline of 0.042 mag d$^{-1}$ is faster than that of

865: $^{56}$Co, 0.0098 mag d$^{-1}$, making radioactive heating unlikely

866: as the dominant source of the energy.

867: 

868: Despite the lack of a Type IIn spectrum, the most likely

869: interpretation seems to be that the high luminosity of \sn\ is the

870: result of converting shock energy into visual light.  This can be

871: accomplished, in principle, if the shock kinetic energy is thermalized

872: throughout a massive envelope, like a normal SN~II-P or II-L, but with

873: a much larger initial radius of (2--3) $\times 10^{15}$ cm (based on

874: the peak luminosity and the evolution in Fig.~\ref{bol_lum}). Were

875: the initial radius much smaller than this it would prove difficult to

876: convert $\sim$10$^{51}$ ergs of kinetic energy to $\sim$10$^{51}$ ergs

877: of radiation because there would be significant adiabatic losses.  The

878: apparent temperature evolution from $\sim$15,000 to 6000 K over a time

879: period of $\sim$66~d (Fig.~\ref{bol_lum}), reminiscent of other

880: normal SNe~II, suggests that the recombination photosphere is receding

881: through a cooling envelope in \sn.  In this scenario, the usual

882: narrow/intermediate-width H$\alpha$ emission that is taken as a

883: signpost of CSM interaction might be avoided if the CSM shell is

884: initially very opaque, and if the shock encounters no further CSM

885: at larger radii (see \citealt{smith06tf}).

886: 

887: Since the required initial radius exceeds that of the largest known

888: red supergiants (see \citealt{smith2001}) by a factor of 20--30, it

889: requires the envelope to be an unbound, opaque CSM shell ejected prior

890: to the SN explosion instead of a traditional bound stellar envelope.

891: Similar models were suggested for SN~2005ap \citep{quimby05ap},

892: SN~2006gy \citep{smith+mccray07}, and SN~2006tf \citep{smith06tf},

893: implying CSM envelope masses of 0.6, $\sim$10, and 18 M$_{\odot}$,

894: respectively. The corresponding CSM mass for \sn\ would be roughly

895: $\sim$5 M$_{\odot}$ in this scenario, because its evolution and

896: expansion speeds are slower than those of SN~2005ap.  This CSM mass of

897: $\sim$5~M$_{\odot}$ allows the observed H$\alpha$ Doppler velocities

898: to remain faster than in SNe~2006gy and 2006tf, where the heavy CSM

899: shells decelerated the shocks to only 4000 and 2000 km s$^{-1}$,

900: respectively (\citealt{smith07-2006gy}; \citealt{smith06tf}). The

901: smaller CSM mass for \sn\ relative to SNe~2006gy and 2006tf would also

902: explain the comparatively short rise and decay observed for \sn, as

903: the light diffusion time for this SN is much shorter than in

904: SNe~2006gy and 2006tf \citep{smith+mccray07}.  The putative envelope

905: ejection preceding \sn\ must have occurred 10--100 yr prior to the

906: explosion (for an unknown progenitor wind speed of $v_{\rm CSM}$ =

907: 10--100 km s$^{-1}$), indicating a progenitor mass-loss rate of order

908: 0.05--0.5 M$_{\odot}$ yr$^{-1}$.  This is much larger than any steady

909: stellar wind (see \citealt{smith07-2006gy}, and references therein),

910: providing another case of impulsive mass ejection in the decades

911: immediately preceding some SNe.

912: 

913: An alternative analysis of \sn, submitted for publication shortly

914: after this paper was made available electronically, also suggests 

915: that the extreme luminosity is powered via interaction with CSM

916: \citep{gezari08}. However, the initial version of \citet{gezari08}

917: argues against an unbound CSM shell ejection prior to the SN

918: explosion, and instead argues that the CSM is created by a dense 

919: progenitor wind.

920: 

921: \subsection{The Host of \sn}

922: 

923: Currently there is no conclusive detection of the host galaxy of

924: SN~2008es, so its metallicity and corresponding implications for the

925: pre-SN evolution are not known. From SDSS

926: DR6 images \citep{adelman08}, we derive a 3$\sigma$ upper limit of

927: $m_{r'} >$ 22.7 mag at the SN position, which translates to roughly

928: $M_V > -$17.4 mag at the SN redshift (neglecting any K

929: corrections). Thus, the putative host galaxy is significantly less

930: luminous than an $L_*$ galaxy and could be comparable to or fainter

931: than the Small Magellanic Cloud (with $M_V=-16.9$ mag)\footnote{A

932: galaxy $\sim$9$\arcsec$ to the NE of the SN position is unlikely to be

933: the host itself even if found to be at a similar redshift as \sn; this

934: would require significant massive star formation at a projected

935: physical distance of $\sim$31 kpc.}. 

936: 

937: Without a definitive detection of the host galaxy we assume that there

938: is no host extinction. This assumption is further supported by both

939: the low luminosity of the host galaxy and our BB fits (see $\S$3) that

940: show excellent agreement with our UV measurements, where the effects

941: of host extinction would be especially prominent. In analogy with the

942: underluminous hosts of SNe~2006tf \citep{smith06tf} and 2005ap

943: \citep{quimby05ap}, deep imaging after the SN has faded may uncover

944: the host galaxy nearly coincident with the SN position, which would

945: allow further constraints to be placed on extinction in the

946: host. These three extreme SNe and their underluminous hosts may be

947: hinting that very luminous SNe II preferentially occur in

948: low-luminosity host galaxies.

949: 

950: \subsection{Rates of Extremely Luminous \sn-like Events}

951: 

952: Over the past three years the TSS has successfully found tens of SNe

953: with a surprising rate of unusual objects. The list of such SNe

954: includes SN~2005ap, SN~2006gy, SN~2006tf, SN~2008am, and now

955: \sn. However, this apparent high anomaly rate is probably the result

956: of combining a huge survey volume with an intrinsically rare class of

957: objects. Following \citet{quimby2008}, we compare the volume probed by

958: the TSS for SNe Ia, and bright core-collapse SNe. The highest redshift

959: of the $\sim$30 SNe~Ia found by the TSS is $z\approx0.1$, while

960: SN~2005ap was found at $z\approx0.3$. The comoving volume scanned by

961: the TSS is therefore $\sim$23 times bigger for SN~2008es-like objects

962: than for SNe~Ia. Of the five bright objects found by the TSS, only

963: two, SN~2005ap and SN~2008es, can be considered together as a

964: class. Thus, the comparative rate is about $30/2 \times 23 \approx

965: 350$ times smaller.

966: 

967: The KAIT SN search \citep{filippenkoLOSS} has discovered about 400

968: SNe~Ia in the past 10 years in targeted nearby galaxies, hence the

969: expected number of SN~2008es-like objects is of order 1. This is

970: consistent with the nondetection of any such SN.

971: 

972: Using the light curve of \sn\ and the accumulated observations of

973: about $10,000$ spiral galaxies in the KAIT sample which were observed

974: regularly during the past ten years, we find an upper limit on the

975: rate (per unit $K$-band luminosity) of such SNe to be about $1/160$

976: times the local SN~II rate \citep{leaman2009}. Furthermore, we note

977: that if SN~2008es-like events preferentially occur in small,

978: low-metallicity galaxies (see $\S$ 5.2), the KAIT sample, which

979: targets large, nearby galaxies, would be biased against the discovery

980: of such a SN.  While there are several SN search surveys with larger

981: search volumes than the TSS, such as the SDSS-II Supernova Survey

982: \citep{sako08}, the full details of these surveys (cadence, total

983: survey volume, candidate SN color cuts, etc.) are not available at

984: this time, and therefore we cannot directly compare them to the TSS.

985: We conclude that the number of luminous Type II-L SNe, as discovered

986: by the TSS, does not appear to be the result of a statistical fluke,

987: and predict many such detections with future wide-field synoptic

988: surveys.

989: 

990: \section{Conclusions}

991: 

992: We have reported on our early observations of \sn, which at a peak

993: optical magnitude of $M_V = -22.3$ is the second most luminous SN ever

994: observed.  We argue that the extreme luminosity of this SN was likely

995: powered via strong interaction with a dense CSM, and that the steep

996: decline in the light curve, 0.042 mag d$^{-1}$, indicates that the

997: radioactive decay of $^{56}$Co is likely not the dominant source of

998: energy for this SN. Integration of the bolometric light curve of \sn\

999: yields a total radiated energy output of $\ga$ 10$^{51}$ ergs.  The

1000: optical spectra of \sn\ resemble those of the luminous SN~1979C, but

1001: with an unexplained increase in the velocity of the H$\beta$

1002: absorption minimum over time. 

1003: 

1004:  We also examined the rate of discovery of extremely luminous SNe by

1005: the Texas Supernova Search and find that their discovery of the five

1006: most luminous observed SNe in the past four years is probably not a

1007: fluke; several more such detections are expected in the coming years.

1008: 

1009: Finally, what behavior can we expect from \sn\ at late times, roughly

1010: 1 yr or more after discovery?  Regardless of whether the peak

1011: luminosity was powered by radioactive decay or optically thick CSM

1012: interaction (see \citealt{smith08-2006gy}), a SN can be powered by

1013: strong CSM interaction at late times if the progenitor had a

1014: sufficiently high mass-loss rate in the centuries before exploding.

1015: We have seen examples of both: SN~2006tf had strong H$\alpha$ emission

1016: indicative of ongoing CSM interaction at late times \citep{smith06tf},

1017: whereas SN~2006gy did not \citep{smith08-2006gy}.  SN~1979C was less

1018: luminous at peak than those two SNe, but it has been studied for three

1019: decades because its late-time CSM interaction is powering ongoing

1020: emission in the radio, optical, and X-rays \citep{weiler81,fesen93,

1021: immler98}. With such an extraordinarily high peak luminosity, a

1022: late-time IR echo such as that seen in SN~2006gy \citep{smith08-2006gy}

1023: is also likely if \sn\ has dust waiting at a radius of $\sim$0.3 pc.

1024: Alternatively, if \sn\ were powered in whole or in part by

1025: radioactivity, a large mass of $^{56}$Ni should be evident in the

1026: late-time decline rate.

1027: 

1028: \acknowledgments

1029: 

1030: We thank the anonymous referee for comments that helped improve this

1031: paper. We are grateful to B.~Jannuzi for approving Kitt Peak DD

1032: observations, and to Diane Harmer and David L. Summers for carrying

1033: out the observations. M. Malkan accommodated a small telescope time

1034: trade, while N. Joubert and B. Macomber assisted with some of the

1035: observations. P. Nugent kindly checked for pre-discovery images of SN

1036: 2008es from DeepSky. A.A.M. is supported by a UC Berkeley Chancellor's

1037: Fellowship. M.M. is supported by a Miller Institute research

1038: fellowship. N.R.B. and D.A.P. are partially supported by a SciDAC

1039: grant from the Department of Energy. J.S.B.'s group is partially

1040: supported by NASA/{\it Swift} grant \#NNG05GF55G and a Hellman Faculty

1041: Award.  A.V.F.'s group is supported by National Science Foundation

1042: (NSF) grant AST--0607485 and the TABASGO Foundation.  The Peters

1043: Automated Infrared Imaging Telescope is operated by the Smithsonian

1044: Astrophysical Observatory (SAO) and was made possible by a grant from

1045: the Harvard University Milton Fund, the camera loan from the

1046: University of Virginia, and the continued support of the SAO and UC

1047: Berkeley. The PAIRITEL project is partially supported by NASA/{\it

1048: Swift} Guest Investigator Grant \#NNG06GH50G.  KAIT and its ongoing

1049: operation were made possible by donations from Sun Microsystems, Inc.,

1050: the Hewlett-Packard Company, AutoScope Corporation, Lick Observatory,

1051: the NSF, the University of California, the Sylvia \& Jim Katzman

1052: Foundation, and the TABASGO Foundation. We acknowledge the use of

1053: public data from the {\it Swift} data archive. Some of the data

1054: presented herein were obtained at the W. M. Keck Observatory, which is

1055: operated as a scientific partnership among the California Institute of

1056: Technology, the University of California, and NASA; the Observatory

1057: was made possible by the generous financial support of the W. M. Keck

1058: Foundation. The authors wish to recognize and acknowledge the very

1059: significant cultural role and reverence that the summit of Mauna Kea

1060: has always had within the indigenous Hawaiian community; we are most

1061: fortunate to have the opportunity to conduct observations from this

1062: mountain.

1063: 

1064: %\bibliographystyle{apj1c}

1065: 

1066: %\bibliography{papers}

1067: 

1068: \begin{thebibliography}{}

1069: 

1070: \bibitem[{Adelman-McCarthy} {et al.}\ (2008)]{adelman08}

1071: {Adelman-McCarthy}, J.~K., {et al.}\  2008, \apjs, 175, 297

1072: 

1073: \bibitem[{Akerlof} {et al.}\ (2003)]{akerlof03}

1074: {Akerlof}, C.~W., {et al.}\ 2003, \pasp, 115, 132

1075: 

1076: \bibitem[Barbary {et al.}\ (2008)]{bdt+08}

1077: Barbary, K., {et al.}\  2008, \apj, submitted

1078: 

1079: \bibitem[{Barbon}, {Ciatti}, \& {Rosino} (1979)]{barbon79}

1080: {Barbon}, R., {Ciatti}, F., \& {Rosino}, L. 1979, \aap, 72, 287

1081: 

1082: \bibitem[{Barbon}, {Ciatti}, \& {Rosino} (1982)]{barbon82}

1083: {Barbon}, R., {Ciatti}, F., \& {Rosino}, L. 1982, \aap, 116, 35

1084: 

1085: \bibitem[{Barkat}, {Rakavy}, \& {Sack}(1967)]{barkat67}

1086: {Barkat}, Z., {Rakavy}, G., \& {Sack}, N. 1967, Physical Review Letters, 18,

1087:   379

1088: 

1089: \bibitem[{Becker} {et al.}\ (2004)]{2004ApJ...611..418B}

1090: {Becker}, A.~C., {et al.}\  2004, \apj, 611, 418

1091: 

1092: \bibitem[{Blondin} \& {Tonry}(2007)]{snid07}

1093: {Blondin}, S., \& {Tonry}, J.~L. 2007, \apj, 666, 1024

1094: 

1095: \bibitem[{Bloom} {et al.}\ (2008)]{bloom080319b}

1096: {Bloom}, J.~S., {et al.}\  2008, ApJ, submitted (arXiv:0803.3215)

1097: 

1098: \bibitem[{Bloom} {et al.}\ (2006)]{bloom06}

1099: {Bloom}, J.~S., {Starr}, D.~L., {Blake}, C.~H., {Skrutskie}, M.~F., \& {Falco}, E.~E.

1100: 2006, in { Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems XV}, ed.\ C. {Gabriel}, 

1101: et al. (San Francisco: ASP), 751

1102: 

1103: \bibitem[{Bond}, {Arnett} \& {Carr}(1984)]{bond84}

1104: {Bond}, J.~R., {Arnett}, W.~D., \& {Carr}, B.~J. 1984, \apj, 280, 825

1105: 

1106: \bibitem[{Bramich} {et al.}\ (2008)]{2008MNRAS.386..887B}

1107: {Bramich}, D.~M., {et al.}\  2008, \mnras, 386, 887

1108: 

1109: \bibitem[{Branch} {et al.}\ (1981)]{branch81}

1110: {Branch}, D., {Falk}, S.~W., {Uomoto}, A.~K., {Wills},  B.~J., {McCall}, M.~L.,

1111: \& {Rybski}, P. 1981, \apj, 244, 780

1112: 

1113: \bibitem[{Branch} {et al.}\ (2000)]{branch00}

1114: {Branch}, D., {Jeffery}, D.~J., {Blaylock}, M., \& {Hatano}, K. 

1115: 2000, \pasp, 112, 217

1116: 

1117: \bibitem[{Burrows} {et al.}\ (2005)]{burrows05}

1118: {Burrows}, D.~N., {et al.}\ 2005, Space Sci. Rev., 120, 165

1119: 

1120: \bibitem[{Chornock} {et al.}\ (2008a)]{ATEL.1644}

1121: {Chornock}, R., {Miller}, A.~A., {Bloom}, J.~S., \&  {Perley}, D.~A. 

1122: 2008a, The Astronomer's Telegram, 1644

1123: 

1124: \bibitem[{Chornock} {et al.}\ (2008b)]{2008CBET.1462....1C}

1125: {Chornock}, R., {et al.}\  2008b, Central Bureau Electronic Telegrams, 1462

1126: 

1127: \bibitem[{Doggett} \& {Branch}(1985)]{doggett85}

1128: {Doggett}, J.~B., \& Branch, D. 1985, \aj, 90, 2303

1129: 

1130: \bibitem[{Fesen} \& {Matonick}(1993)]{fesen93}

1131: {Fesen}, R.~A., \& {Matonick}, D.~M. 1993, \apj, 407, 110

1132: 

1133: \bibitem[{Filippenko}(1982)]{fil82}

1134: {Filippenko}, A.~V. 1982, \pasp, 94, 715

1135: 

1136: \bibitem[{Filippenko}(1997)]{fil97}

1137: {Filippenko}, A.~V. 1997, \araa, 35, 309

1138: 

1139: \bibitem[{Filippenko} {et al.}\ (2001)]{filippenkoLOSS}

1140: {Filippenko}, A.~V., {Li}, W.~D., {Treffers}, R.~R., \& {Modjaz}, M. 

1141: 2001, in { IAU Colloq. 183: Small Telescope Astronomy on Global 

1142: Scales}, ed.\ B. {Paczynski}, W.-P. {Chen}, \& C. {Lemme}, 

1143: (San Francisco: ASP), 121

1144: 

1145: \bibitem[{Gezari} {et al.}\ (2008a)]{2008ATel.1578....1G}

1146: {Gezari}, S., {et al.}\  2008a, The Astronomer's Telegram, 1578

1147: 

1148: \bibitem[{Gezari} {et al.}\ (2008b)]{gezari08}

1149: {Gezari}, S., {et al.}\  2008b, \apj, submitted (arXiv:0808.2812v1)

1150: 

1151: \bibitem[{Gezari} \& {Halpern}(2008)]{ATEL.1524}

1152: {Gezari}, S., \& {Halpern}, J.~P. 2008, The Astronomer's Telegram, 1524

1153: 

1154: \bibitem[{Immler}, {Pietsch}, \& {Aschenbach}(1998)]{immler98}

1155: {Immler}, S., {Pietsch}, W., \& {Aschenbach}, B. 1998, \aap, 331, 601

1156: 

1157: \bibitem[{Immler} {et al.}\ (2007)]{immler07}

1158: {Immler}, S., {et al.}\  2007, \apj, 664, 435

1159: 

1160: \bibitem[{Jeffery} \& {Branch}(1990)]{jb90}

1161: {Jeffery}, D.~J., \& Branch, D. 1990, in Jerusalem Winter School for

1162: Theoretical Physics: Supernovae, ed. J. C. Wheeler, T. Piran, \&

1163: S. Weinberg (Singapore: World Scientific), 149 

1164: 

1165: \bibitem[{Jester} {et al.}\ (2005)]{jester2005}

1166: {Jester}, S., {et al.}\  2005, \aj, 130, 873

1167: 

1168: \bibitem[{Leaman}, {Li}, \& {Filippenko}(2009)]{leaman2009}

1169: {Leaman}, J., {Li}, W., \& {Filippenko}, A. V. 2009, in prep

1170: 

1171: \bibitem[{Leonard} {et al.}\ (2000)]{leonard00}

1172: {Leonard}, D.~C., {Filippenko}, A.~V., {Barth}, A.~J., \& {Matheson}, T. 

1173: 2000, \apj, 536, 239

1174: 

1175: \bibitem[{Li} {et al.}\ (2006)]{li06}

1176: {Li}, W., {Jha}, S., {Filippenko}, A.~V., {Bloom}, J.~S., 

1177: {Pooley}, D., {Foley}, R.~J., \& {Perley}, D.~A. 2006, \pasp, 118, 37

1178: 

1179: \bibitem[{Matheson} {et al.}\ (2000)]{matheson00}

1180: {Matheson}, T., {Filippenko}, A.~V., {Ho}, L.~C., {Barth}, A.~J., \& 

1181: {Leonard}, D.~C. 2000, \aj, 120, 1499

1182: 

1183: \bibitem[{Miller} {et al.}\ (2008)]{ATEL.1576}

1184: {Miller}, A.~A., {et al.}\  2008, The Astronomer's Telegram, 1576

1185: 

1186: \bibitem[{Miller} \& {Stone}(1993)]{kastref}

1187: {Miller}, J.~S., \& {Stone}, R.~P.~S. 1993.

1188: \newblock Lick Observatory Technical Reports~66, University of California

1189: 

1190: \bibitem[{Modjaz} (2007)]{modjaz07_thesis}

1191: {Modjaz}, M. 2007, PhD thesis, Harvard University

1192: 

1193: \bibitem[{Modjaz} {et al.}\ (2008)]{modjaz08d}

1194: {Modjaz}, M., {et al.}\  2008, \apj, submitted (arXiv:0805.2201)

1195: 

1196: \bibitem[{Morales-Rueda} {et al.}\ (2006)]{2006MNRAS.371.1681M}

1197: {Morales-Rueda}, L., {Groot}, P.~J., {Augusteijn}, T., {Nelemans}, G., 

1198: {Vreeswijk}, P.~M., \& {van den Besselaar}, E.~J.~M. 2006, \mnras, 371, 1681

1199: 

1200: \bibitem[{Niemela}, {Ruiz}, \& {Phillips}(1985)]{niemela85}

1201: {Niemela}, V.~S., {Ruiz}, M.~T., \& {Phillips}, M.~M. 1985, \apj, 289, 52

1202: 

1203: \bibitem[{Ofek} {et al.}\ (2007)]{ofek06gy}

1204: {Ofek}, E.~O., {et al.}\  2007, \apjl, 659, L13

1205: 

1206: \bibitem[{Oke} {et al.}\ (1995)]{oke95}

1207: {Oke}, J.~B., {et al.}\  1995, \pasp, 107, 375

1208: 

1209: \bibitem[{Panagia} {et al.}\ (1980)]{panagia1980}

1210: {Panagia}, N., {et al.}\ 1980, \mnras, 192, 861

1211: 

1212: \bibitem[{Poole} {et al.}\ (2008)]{poole2008}

1213: {Poole}, T.~S., {et al.}\  2008, \mnras, 383, 627

1214: 

1215: \bibitem[{Prieto} {et al.}\ (2007)]{prieto05gj}

1216: {Prieto}, J.~L., {et al.}\  2007, \aj, submitted (arXiv:0706.4088)

1217: 

1218: \bibitem[{Quimby}\ (2006)]{quimbyTSS}

1219: {Quimby}, R. 2006, BAAS, 38, 1216

1220: 

1221: \bibitem[{Quimby}\ (2008)]{quimby2008}

1222: {Quimby}, R.~M. 2008, in { New Horizons in Astronomy: Frank N. Bash 

1223: Symposium 2007 }, ed.\ A. {Frebel}, et al. (San Francisco: ASP), 141

1224: 

1225: \bibitem[{Quimby} {et al.}\ (2007)]{quimby05ap}

1226: {Quimby}, R.~M., {Aldering}, G., {Wheeler}, J.~C., {H{\"o}flich}, P., 

1227: {Akerlof}, C.~W., \& {Rykoff}, E.~S. 2007, \apjl, 668, L99

1228: 

1229: \bibitem[{Rau} {et al.}\ (2008)]{2008ApJ...682.1205R}

1230: {Rau}, A., {Ofek}, E.~O., {Kulkarni}, S.~R., {Madore}, B.~F., 

1231: {Pevunova}, O., \& {Ajello}, M. 2008, \apj, 682, 1205

1232: 

1233: \bibitem[{Richardson} {et al.}\ (2002)]{richardson02}

1234: {Richardson}, D., {Branch}, D., {Casebeer}, D., {Millard}, J.,

1235: {Thomas}, R.~C., \& {Baron}, E. 2002, \aj, 123, 745

1236: 

1237: \bibitem[{Roming} {et al.}\ (2005)]{roming05}

1238: Roming, P.~W.~A., {et al.}\ 2005, Space Sci. Rev., 120, 95

1239: 

1240: \bibitem[{Sako} {et al.}\ (2008)]{sako08}

1241: {Sako}, M., et al. 2008, \aj, 135, 348

1242: 

1243: \bibitem[{Schlegel}(1996)]{schlegel96}

1244: {Schlegel}, E.~M. 1996, \aj, 111, 1660

1245: 

1246: \bibitem[{Schlegel} {et al.}\ (1998)]{schlegel98}

1247: {Schlegel}, D.~J., {Finkbeiner}, D.~P., \& Davis, M. 1998, \apj, 500, 525

1248: 

1249: \bibitem[{Smith} \& {McCray}(2007)]{smith+mccray07}

1250: {Smith}, N., \& {McCray}, R. 2007, \apjl, 671, L17

1251: 

1252: \bibitem[{Smith} {et al.}\ (2008a)]{smith06tf}

1253: {Smith}, N., {Chornock}, R., {Li}, W., {Ganeshalingam}, M., 

1254: {Silverman}, J.~M., {Foley}, R.~J., {Filippenko}, A.~V., \& 

1255: {Barth}, A.~J. 2008a, \apj, in press (arXiv:0804.0042)

1256: 

1257: \bibitem[{Smith} {et al.}\ (2001)]{smith2001}

1258: {Smith}, N., {Humphreys}, R.~M., {Davidson}, K., {Gehrz}, R.~D.,

1259: {Schuster}, M.~T., \& Krautter, J. 2001, \aj, 121, 1111

1260: 

1261: \bibitem[{Smith} {et al.}\ (2007)]{smith07-2006gy}

1262: {Smith}, N., {et al.}\  2007, \apj, 666, 1116

1263: 

1264: \bibitem[{Smith} {et al.}\ (2008b)]{smith08-2006gy}

1265: {Smith}, N., {et al.}\  2008b, \apj, accepted (arXiv:0802.1743)

1266: 

1267: \bibitem[{Stetson}(1987)]{1987PASP...99..191S:stetson}

1268: {Stetson}, P.~B. 1987, \pasp, 99, 191

1269: 

1270: \bibitem[{Tominaga} {et al.}\ (2005)]{tominaga05bf}

1271: {Tominaga}, N., {et al.}\  2005, \apjl, 633, L97

1272: 

1273: \bibitem[{Uomoto} \& {Kirshner}(1986)]{uomoto86}

1274: {Uomoto}, A., \& {Kirshner}, R.~P. 1986, \apj, 308, 685

1275: 

1276: \bibitem[{Weiler} {et al.}\ (1981)]{weiler81}

1277: {Weiler}, K.~W., {van der Hulst}, J.~M., Sramek, R.~A., \& Panagia,

1278: N. 1981, \apjl, 243, 151

1279: 

1280: \bibitem[{Yuan} {et al.}\ (2008a)]{ATEL.1389}

1281: {Yuan}, F., {et al.}\ 2008a, The Astronomer's Telegram, 1389

1282: 

1283: \bibitem[{Yuan} {et al.}\ (2008b)]{ATEL.1515}

1284: {Yuan}, F., {Quimby}, R., {McKay}, T., {Chamarro}, D., {Sisson}, M.~D., 

1285: {Akerlof}, C., \& {Wheeler}, J.~C. 2008b, The Astronomer's Telegram, 1515

1286: 

1287: 

1288: \end{thebibliography}

1289: 

1290: \clearpage

1291: 

1292: 

1293: \end{document}

1294: