Dear Flemming,
you and Jens Jorgen are both right. We cannot make that
much use of such a run, it will almost certainly take longer and
it should have been better planned.
Yours Michael
Quoting Flemming Videbaek <videbaek@sgs1.hirg.bnl.gov>:
> I just received this message from Tom Kirk. I will let you ponder on
> this,
> but since this is done with very short notice, and have send Tom a
> reply
> this evening, particular since I will not be at BNL until ~ 3pm (if at
> all)
> tomorrow.
> The reply will be forwarded to you in the subsequent mail.
>
> If you have additional comments please reply to me and Dana who will be
> present at the meeting tomorrow.
> regards
> Flemming
>
> ------------------------------------------------------
> Flemming Videbaek
> Physics Department
> Brookhaven National Laboratory
>
> tlf: 631-344-4106
> fax 631-344-1334
> e-mail: videbaek@bnl.gov
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "tom kirk" <tkirk@bnl.gov>
> To: "Busza, Wit" <busza@mit.edu>; "Harris, John"
> <John.Harris@yale.edu>;
> "Videbaek, Flemming" <videbaek@bnl.gov>; "Zajc, Bill"
> <zajc@columbia.edu>
> Cc: "Lowenstein, Derek" <lowenstein@bnl.gov>; "Roser, Thomas"
> <roser1@bnl.gov>; "Pile, Phil" <Pile@bnl.gov>; "Aronson, Sam"
> <aronson2@bnl.gov>; "Kirk, Tom" <tkirk@bnl.gov>; "Drees, Angelika"
> <drees@bnl.gov>; "Kirk, Tom" <tkirk@bnl.gov>
> Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 5:47 PM
> Subject: RHIC Au x Au Running at 22 GeV
>
>
> > . November 13, 2001
> >
> > Dear Wit, John, Flemming and Bill:
> >
> > As I believe all of you know (by conversation with me
> > or by the grapevine), PHOBOS has proposed to have a
> > 24-hour run of RHIC at 22 GeV to establish a low-
> > energy point for RHIC Au x Au data. This point would
> > be free of the systematic errors heretofore used to
> > compare low energy data from SPS and other sources
> > with RHIC data. So far, there is only an official
> > letter proposal from PHOBOS, but if we go ahead with
> > the proposed 22 GeV run, I would sincerely hope that
> > the other RHIC experiments would also take data.
> >
> > After having had my interaction about 22 GeV running
> > with Wit Busza, I was visited by Dmitri Kharzeev, who
> > also strongly advocated the physics value of this run.
> > Dmitri also sent me a letter with his physics arguments
> > which I supply to you here as an attachment (actually,
> > it is only a fair copy that my secretary keyed in from
> > the original). I found Dima's arguments pursuasive.
> >
> > Thus, I would like to discuss with representatives of
> > the four RHIC experiments tomorrow at the 1:30PM RHIC
> > Meeting at C-AD, the feasibility and consequences of
> > adding this run to the Au x Au run schedule. Since we
> > are on very short funding rations, this run would NOT
> > extend the total Au run. I hope each of the RHIC
> > experiments will be represented for a discussion of
> > the PHOBOS letter proposal tomorrow. To start off the
> > discussion, Thomas Roser has agreed to summarize the
> > machine aspects of a 22 GeV run. They will include
> > beta* of 10 Meters (injection value) at all interaction
> > points and may have very short luminosity lifetimes.
> > Thomas will go over these and other germane accelerator
> > considerations.
> >
> > I am biased in favor of approving this run for 22 GeV
> > for 24 hours. Still, I want to hear the views of all
> > four RHIC groups and, if the run takes place, whether
> > all four groups could and would take data.
> >
> > See you tomorrow!
> >
> > Sincerely, Tom Kirk
> >
> > Cc: D. Lowenstein
> > T. Roser
> > P. Pile
> > A. Drees
> > S. Aronson
>
Michael Murray, Cyclotron TAMU, 979 845 1411 x 273, Fax 1899
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Wed Nov 14 2001 - 08:41:09 EST