Dear JH and BRAHMS friends.
Many thanks for your proposal, JH.
I concur with you that we have material for more publications. I do not
, however,
think that we can live with the inevitable delays following from more
grandiose ambitions.
BRAHMS needs visibility ASAP.
My feeling is the following:
1. publish pbar/p with present content on the shortest possible time
scale.
I think we should keep the pi ratios and the K's as this gives
confidence in the entire analysis and supports the physics
conclusion.
If the p/pbar at 60 or 40 deg. is available within the next 2 weeks
we add the point
to the plots for better coverage. Else it will come in a later
publ.
2. The mult.paper has next priority. It should also go in very fast,
else PHOBOS will preempty the story. We now have dN/deta estimates from
5 systems: si, Tiles, BB, MTPC1-tracks, T1-tracks.
To me the entire story looks very consistent.
3. The slopes and betters comprehensive ratios and DN/Dy can follow soon
afterwards or even go in simultaneously. I have just not seen any of
this yet, so I would think that it will take longer to produce a final
paper than item 1. By that time scale I would guess that we have the MC
acceptance corrections for the FS also so that we may address DN/DY or
at least DN2/DnDpt at forward angles.
I think it is a fatal mistake to aim at including as much as possible in
each paper at the expense of delays. At the rate the other experiments
are going (and with no scruples) we MUST show our face to the public. If
we drag our feet, nobody will remember us for the extra point, but they
will certainly remember that we came after the train had left.
I would hate to go and argue for upgrades to BRAHMS if we don't have
results out.
best regards to all
JJ
PS 1: Thanks to RAMI for converting the papers to Latex.
PS 2: Who will look into the Nch/Npart-pair vs Npart? Why is our curve
so flat? There is physics in the shape of this curve. Is is because we
need a better geom. model. or because the momentum range is different
from PHOBOS and PHENIX?
PS 3: I eagerly await comments on the physics in the 2 paper drafts from
the rest of the collaboration. Don't hold back!
>
> Dear Collaborators,
>
> For the first publication of BRAHMS, I would like to propose
> that we write two separate papers (letters) on the particle ratios
> instead of one which is currently drafted. I believe this is NOT
> at cost of sacrificing qualities and timing of our first
> publication(s).
>
> - The time to take to submit our first paper should be similar
> (or shorter) as we currently planed ~ 1 month
> - By adding another unique result, ratios from MRS at
> 40/45 degree, we can publish more systematic measurements
> - We have nice and unique results. We can write two high-quality
> papers instead of one!
> - The time gap between two papers can be less than a month.
>
> My proposals for the two papers are
>
> 1) "Rapidity and centrality dependent pbar/p ratio in Au+Au Collisions
> at sqrt(s)=130AGeV".
>
> and
>
> 2) "Transverse-momentum and centrality dependent particle ratios
> (and spectra) at Mid-Rapidity in Au+Au collisions at sqrt(s)=130AGeV".
>
>
> The first one is to concentrate on pbar/p ratios including data sets
> from
> Mid-rapidity at 40/45, 90 degrees and FS at 4 degree:
> This will give very nice SYSTEMATIC measurements on net-proton
> distributions.
> - Systematic: 3 rapidity points instead of two
> - Unique ratios: 4 degree, 40/45 degree
> - I think we can produce particle ratios at MRS 40/45 degree in a
> month.
>
> The second paper includes pi-/pi+, K-/K+, pbar/p, K/pi ratios from MRS
> at 90 degree:
> - Independent measurements
> - High quality PID
> - Wide pt coverage, especially for pbar/p
> - Ratios at high pt (>1GeV/c) are not yet published
> - Particle spectra also can be included
> - This paper can be submitted first.
>
> Let me repeat. We have nice and unique results.
> I believe we can write two nice papers on particle ratios/(spectra)
> from our
> two spectrometers in a couple of month.
>
> Regards, JH
>
--
____________________________________________________
JENS JORGEN GAARDHOJE
Assoc. Prof. of Physics, Dr. Scient.
Niels Bohr Institute,
University of Copenhagen
Blegdamsvej 17, 2100 Copenhagen
Denmark.
Tlf: (+45) 35 32 53 09 (dir)
(+45) 35 32 52 09 (secr)
Fax: (+45) 35 32 50 16
Email: gardhoje @ nbi.dk
Home page: http://alf.nbi.dk/~gardhoje
-Chair Ph. D. School of Physics at NBI.F.AFG.
(secr. Frank Kristensen 35 32 04 41, Ørsted Lab.)
-Member Danish National Commission for UNESCO
(secr. Ulla Holm 35 32 52 72, NBI)
___________________________________________________
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jan 25 2001 - 11:14:31 EST