Dear Chellis,
it is interesting that the RMS eta decreases with
centrality. For SPS Et and Multiplicity Helios showed the opposite
trend. Note the compressed Table 1 is still slightly over 1
column. If we have to go to a two column table the RMS eta could
be added as a separate column along with the data from more of
the eta bins. Also we should make something from limiting
fragmentation.
Yours Michael
> C)Two comments on physics:
> 1) As I have said, I believe we have independent evidence
> that the distributions become narrower with increased
>
> centrality. This seems counter-intuitive to me and thus
> an interesting observation. Perhaps it is worth a
> sentence in the paper.
> 2) We mention the fragmentaion region and even show a
> figure. However, there is no indication of the physics
> importance either on page 5 or in the conclusions. By
> the way: Is .7<eta<1.5 the fragmentation region?
> D)Comment on Title:
> A agree with those who feel the title is too grandiose
> for the conclusion. This paper is neither initiating this
> discussion nor resolving it.
>
> Chellis
>
>
Michael Murray, Cyclotron TAMU, 979 845 1411 x 273, Fax 1899
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Wed Nov 21 2001 - 12:13:49 EST