10:24:26	 From Mike Hudson : The WINGS isotropic orbits look more isotropic than the simulations at z=0
10:43:34	 From A. Biviano : The isotropic orbits of E and S0 at large radii are seen in nearby clusters not only in the WINGS sample. However they are not seen in simulations, nor at z>0.3. Maybe it is just a problem of the M(r) determination? A M200 over-estimate results in apparent more isotropic orbits. Although it is strange that we are able to determine M(r) more accurately in high-z clusters than in low-z clusters...

10:48:07	 From A. Biviano : Alternatively, the problem lies in the simulations. We need to find a process that is able to isotropize orbits on a relatively short time scale (say from z=0.3 to z=0.0). This could be cluster-subcluster collisions, this process increases the dynamical entropy and cancels out a smooth infall pattern. The radial orbits of S we observe at low-z can still be observed beccause these galaxies are recent arrivals, so they are observed after the cluster has re-established a smooth potential (in a dynamical time, 1 Gyr or so). But cluster-subcluster collisions are of course present in cosmological simulations, so why don't we see this isotropization in simulations, no clear idea. Perhaps it is a matter of comparing apples with apples. As I showed, low-M* and high-M* galaxies have different orbits. We need to compare galaxies of the same M* in real and simulated clusters.
10:53:03	 From Mustafa K. YILDIZ : @Karen, Sorry, I joined a little bit late, maybe you have already mentioned, but what do you use for the NUV? Hubble or GALEX? And how do you define the green valley area? Thanks :)
10:53:37	 From Rhea-Silvia Remus : @ Andrea: And with the low-M* galaxies, we still have a problem of resolution in the full cosmological hydro-simulation, as we need large volumes to get clusters comparable to those you observe, and that means usually not that high resolution. So it is possible that distinguishing E and S0 and S from each others still is not representative of what is observed.
10:54:06	 From Michael Balogh : It’s rest-frame NUV, so that’s like B-band at z>1.  We have deep B imaging from Subaru and VLT which allows this - the actual rest frame colour comes from the SED fitting.
10:55:26	 From Mustafa K. YILDIZ : @Michael, ohh I forgot you look at far far away :) 
10:55:47	 From Michael Balogh : @mustafa yes, it makes _some_ things easier!
11:00:41	 From Thomas Connor (he/him) : The Green Valley spectrum looks to me like the dusty galaxy spectrum from Wolf+05 (https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005A%26A...443..435W/abstract -- Figure 7). But they found that the fractional density of these galaxies decreased toward the cluster center (Fig 10). Since that work was at z=0.17, are we seeing evidence of the settling of the cluster galaxy population with the GOGREEN results? 
11:08:08	 From A. Biviano : @Rhea-Silvia: the trouble is, high-M* galaxies are observed to have the isotropic orbits, but these are the same that simulations are able to resolve, and yet they have radial orbits in simulations!
11:12:17	 From Rhea-Silvia Remus : @Andrea: yes, that is also an issue, but that seems to be somehow correlated with the large galaxies loosing too much mass, becoming low-stellar-mass more quickly than is observed, so that the high-mass is usually at the radial orbits as well. But this could also come from resolutions, as the massive galaxies also only have few particles and thus stripping might work faster than it should. We are trying to push the resolution now to see if that really is the issue - because feedback will not solve this issue, that should be gravity and large scale structure, which is something we should be doing right.... but these simulations are really expensive :)
11:13:02	 From Rhea-Silvia Remus : @Egidijus: How do you separate the BCG from the ICL in the simulations?
11:16:04	 From Bianca Poggianti : e(a) spectra were found to be a common phenomenon in distant clusters (Dressler et al. 1999, Poggianti et al. 1999, Poggianti et al. 2009 from which the plot above is taken….all the distant cluster spectroscopic surveys found them (MORPHS, EdisCS …) - the first interpretation came in Poggianti et al. 1999, see Poggianti & Wu 2001 for local galaxies having e(a) spectra (LIRGs and ULIRGS)
11:16:15	 From Liza Sazonova : @Egidijus: great talk! I may have missed this: how is the compactness of GOGREEN galaxies measured?
11:16:17	 From Gregory Rudnick : Bianca, maybe only the e(c) have 4000 angstrom breaks as strong as in that stack, and weaker balmer lines
11:16:36	 From Gregory Rudnick : The e(a) have much weaker D4000 than in the stack
11:18:10	 From Pascale Jablonka : Some old publication from low-z and mid-z field and cluster galaxies http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/pdf/1995A%26A...298..361J
11:18:51	 From Bianca Poggianti : remember that a stack might be misleading, as you know….and e(a)’s can have a range individually…from the quick look at the spectrum shown it looks pretty similar to our Ediscs stack in the plot I sent (bottom right, e(a)
11:21:24	 From Bianca Poggianti : there is of course a strong evolution of the e(a) spectra population in clusters….eg Fritz et al. 2014 A&A 566 32
11:26:41	 From Roan Haggar : Hi @Egidijus, thanks for the talk! Are you confident that you can trust the properties of BAHAMAS galaxies with masses of ~10^10, given that the mass resolution is only 10^9?
11:31:20	 From Egidijus Kukstas : That's a fair point, it is getting close to the limit. SFRs have been shown to be OK above 10^10 but not lower.
11:34:17	 From Egidijus Kukstas : Have a look at Fig. 15 here: https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2017MNRAS.465.2936M/abstract
11:37:51	 From Kate Rowlands (she/her) : Agree it would be good to split the post-starburst galaxies by stellar mass and make sure that the field sample is also matched in stellar mass, Socolovsky+18, 19 https://arxiv.org/pdf/1802.01593.pdf, https://arxiv.org/pdf/1810.10023.pdf showed that low mass galaxies are preferentially quenched in dense environments.
11:40:46	 From Bianca Poggianti : @Pascale nice, Pascale!! didn’t remember that….very nice, clear e(a) spectra here too….
11:59:19	 From Joel Roediger : Thanks to the GOGREEN team for hosting this.  Great data, great work, and great science!
11:59:25	 From Robert Nikutta : Thank you all, I learned a lot in this workshop!
11:59:29	 From durret : Thanks for inviting us to listen to these nice talks and looking forward to using some of your data!
11:59:45	 From Mustafa K. YILDIZ : Thank you very much for this nice meeting. I enjoyed the talks. Go GoGreen! :)
11:59:52	 From Micol Bolzonella : Thanks for having this meeting public!
11:59:57	 From Liza Sazonova : Thank you all, this was extremely interesting! Excited for all the upcoming results from gogreen :)
12:00:06	 From Leo Yvonne Alcorn : Thank you for all the interesting talks!

12:00:07	 From Ben Floyd : Thank you for hosting this workshop

12:00:23	 From Rhea-Silvia Remus : Thanks to the GoGreen team to letting us join and learn about these exciting data!
12:00:27	 From Roan Haggar : Thanks for the meeting, a really interesting couple of days!
12:00:40	 From Thomas Connor (he/him) : Thanks for organizing this meeting!
12:00:43	 From Mustafa K. YILDIZ : Cheers!
12:00:43	 From German : Thanks!