Many thanks to Hiro (and also Steve) for the figures and the good work
behind them.
I think the data certainly look good enough for a rapid publication in PRL.
The paper committe will start its work immediately now that the real stuff
is available .
In fact I got so inspired by the figures that I already wrote some ideas
down for the introduction- although time was short today.
I send these to the paper team by separate email.
I would propose 4 figures (see below) and a table like the one in the
previous article. This would enable us to keep the text short.
The exp. method is well described in the PLB and we also have the NIM
underway.
___________
Suggestions for figures and for discussion by all.
\newpage
\begin{figure}
\epsfig{file=Mult200fig1.eps,width=15.0cm}
\caption{
Top panel: Distributions of $dN_{ch}/d\eta$ for centrality ranges of,
top to bottom, 0-5\%, 5-10\%, 10-20\%, 20-30\%, 30-40\%, and
40-50\%.
Bottom panel: Distributions of $dN_{ch}/d\eta$ divided by the average number
of participating nucleon pairs as a function of centrality.
}
\label{dndeta}
\end{figure}
\newpage
\begin{figure}
\epsfig{file=Mult200fig2.eps,width=15.0cm}
\caption{
Charged particle densities normalized to the number of
participant pairs for the present 0-5\% central (open circles) and
30-40\% central (open squared) Au+Au results at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$=200 GeV,
the
BRAHMS Au+Au results at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$=130 GeV (closed circles) and the
9.4\% central Pb+Pb data at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$=17 GeV(closed triangles)
of ref.~\cite{deines00}. Here, the different data are plotted as a function
of the pseudorapidity shifted by the relevant beam rapidity, as discussed
in the text.
}
\label{dndeta_fragment}
\end{figure}
\newpage
\begin{figure}
\epsfig{file=Mult200fig3.eps,width=15.0cm}
\caption{
Distribution of the measured $dN_{ch}/d\eta$ for the 6 indicated centrality
ranges. Total uncertainties (statistical and systematic) are indicated.
Data are compared to theoretical predictions by Kharzeev and Levin and to
the predictions of the AMPT model.
}
\label{dndeta_and_models}
\end{figure}
\newpage
\begin{figure}
\epsfig{file=Mult200fig4.eps,width=15.0cm}
\caption{
Left panel: Ratio of the measured $dN_{ch}/d\eta$ distributions at
$\sqrt{s_{NN}}$=200 GeV to the similar distributions at
$\sqrt{s_{NN}}$=130 GeV for centralities 0-5\%,
10-20\% and 30-40\%. Right pane: distributions of $dN_{ch}/d\eta$
per participant pair as a function of the number of partcipants (see table)
for $\eta$= 0,1.5,4.5. The curves show predictions by the Kharzeev and
Levin model.
}
\label{dndeta_and_models}
\end{figure}
________________
I think we can make an interesting story out of the overprediction of the
Kharzeev+Levin model at the intermediate rapidities. this would, taken at
face value suggest - according to their own paper- that saturation is not so
important.(?)
regards
JJ
.
________________________________
Jens Jørgen Gaardhøje
Assoc. prof. Dr. Scient.
Chair Ph.D: school of Physics NBI.f.AFG.
(secretariat. 35 32 04 41)
Chair science committee. UNESCO Natl. Commission.
(secretariat. 33 92 52 16)
Office: Niels Bohr Institute, Blegdamsvej 17,
2100, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Tlf: (+45) 35 32 53 09
Fax: (+45) 35 32 50 16
________________________________
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Wed Oct 10 2001 - 16:13:28 EDT