Re: ratios 3.00 (fwd)

From: Dana Beavis (Beavis@sgs1.hirg.bnl.gov)
Date: Tue Jul 02 2002 - 12:46:25 EDT

  • Next message: Jens Jørgen Gaardhøje: "ratios paper deadline for comments extended to allow for holiday reading" 

    Here is a pdf version of my comments.
dana
----- Original Message -----
From: "Claus O. E. Jorgensen" <ekman@nbi.dk>
To: <brahms-l@bnl.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2002 11:53 AM
Subject: Re: ratios 3.00 (fwd)


>
> Hi Dana,
>
> Could you please send your few comments/questions/confusion in
> another format (like ascii, ps or pdf)?
>
> Claus
>
> +-------------------------------------------------------------+
> | Claus Jørgensen                                             |
> | Cand. Scient.                  Phone  : (+45) 33 32 49 49   |
> |                                Cell   : (+45) 27 28 49 49   |
> | Niels Bohr Institute, Ta-2,    Office : (+45) 35 32 53 07   |
> | Blegdamsvej 17, DK-2100,       E-mail : ekman@nbi.dk        |
> | University of Copenhagen       Home   : www.nbi.dk/~ekman/  |
> +-------------------------------------------------------------+
>
> On Tue, 2 Jul 2002, Dana Beavis wrote:
>
> > Here (attached) are a few comments/questions/confusion.  It is too early
to
> > correct english etc form my view point.
> > dana
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Claus O. E. Jorgensen" <ekman@nbi.dk>
> > To: "brahms-l" <brahms-l@bnl.gov>
> > Sent: Monday, July 01, 2002 7:50 PM
> > Subject: ratios 3.00 (fwd)
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Dear Colleagues,
> > >
> > > Version 3.02 of the ratios paper is now ready. You can find it here:
> > >
> > > http://www.nbi.dk/~ekman/RatioDraft3.02.ps
> > >
> > > Thanks for the many comments from many of you. Much, but of course not
> > all, has found
> > > its way into the manuscript.
> > >
> > > Finally we have decided to drop the AMPT comparison. Only the K ratios
do
> > not agree so
> > > well. The discussion takes space and the calc. will clutter the
otherwise
> > striking fig 3.
> > > We'll save that for a later comparisonor talks.
> > >
> > > We are now at the point where new mods. to the text introduce new
errors.
> > > The length is also OK now.
> > >
> > > A careful last proof reading of numbers would be appreciated by fresh
> > eyes. The ambition is
> > > to submit wednesday afternoon.
> > >
> > > regards
> > > Claus and JJ
> > >
> >
>

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Jul 02 2002 - 12:41:50 EDT