Hi Michael, Thanks for checking on the AMPT calculations. I will include the new references. The figures for the paper are available on the piis in the /home/kansas/dndeta folder. Initially I only had the eps and psd (photoshop) versions. I just used gimp on the photoshop versions to also obtain gif images. These are in the photoshop folder along with the original psd files. Regards, Steve Michael Murray wrote: > Dear Steve, > I am preparing our DOE proposal and would like to use > one of the plots you used in the multiplicity paper. Could you send > me the figures in gif format please. > Yours Michael > > Quoting "Sanders, Stephen J" <ssanders@ku.edu>: > >> Dear Collaborator, >> The paper committee working on the dN/deta paper has what we believe >> is a >> near >> final version for which we would now like to get collaboration >> comments. >> The paper can be >> downloaded in .ps or .pdf format from >> >> http://www.phsx.ukans.edu/~sanders/dndeta/dndeta.ps >> http://www.phsx.ukans.edu/~sanders/dndeta/dndeta.pdf >> >> The LaTeX version can be accessed from the kansas account on the piis in >> the >> directory >> /home/kansas/dndeta >> This directory also contains the figures in photoshop (.psd) and eps >> formats. >> >> The intent is to submit to Physics Letters B by the end of July, >> assuming >> this round of >> collaboration comments goes smoothly. To meet this deadline, we are >> asking >> that you >> submit your comments by next Tuesday, July 24. >> >> The author list and acknowledgements have been copied from the ppbar >> paper. >> Still, please check these >> elements carefully so that we do not inadvertently miss someone or some >> funding agency. >> >> The rationale for a Physics Letters submission, rather than Physical >> Review >> Letters, has several elements. >> The Physics Letters format allows us to more fully develop the details >> of >> our multi-component measurement >> while still being able to highlight the new physics results. We believe >> this >> will be one of the first RHIC >> papers submitted to Physics Letters, which may increase our visibility. >> Also, with the recent PHOBOS submissions to PRL, there would be >> considerable >> overlap between our >> results and those reported by PHOBOS, which could result in delays >> going >> through the refereeing process. >> >> Although we believe the numbers quoted in the draft are "final", the >> analysis crew will >> continue to look for refinements. A particular focus is the approx. >> 10% >> difference that still exists between the >> Si and Tile results. Although this difference is within our systematic >> uncertainties, we would obviously like to >> understand why it exists. Considerable effort has already be expended >> on >> this, however, so a >> "fix" within a reasonable period seems unlikely. >> >> Please copy your comment to all members of the paper committee, as >> listed >> below: >> >> Jens Jorgen Gaardhoje (gardhoje@hehi03.nbi.dk) >> Hiro Ito (hito@students.phsx.ukans.edu) >> J.H. Lee (jhlee@sgs1.hirg.bnl.gov) >> Fouad Rami (Fouad.Rami@IReS.in2p3.fr) >> Steve Sanders (ssanders@falcon.cc.ukans.edu) <-- (My normal >> ssanders@ku.edu >> address will be down this weekend) >> Trine Tveter ( trine@lynx.uio.no) >> >> Specific questions on details of the Si/Tile/BB analysis should be >> directed >> to Hiro, and on the TPM1 analysis to Trine, >> with copies to the full committee. A reasonably large number of >> analysis >> notes and presentations have been developed >> on this material and can be accessed from the Brahms private web pages. >> >> >> Regards, Steve >> > > > > Michael Murray, Cyclotron TAMU, 979 845 1411 x 273, Fax 1899
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sun Jul 22 2001 - 15:29:07 EDT