Re: end of brahms+phobos pp run

From: Dana Beavis (Beavis@sgs1.hirg.bnl.gov)
Date: Fri May 23 2003 - 15:13:55 EDT

  • Next message: Flemming Videbaek: "Fw: Release of STAR Paper on Three-Pion HBT Correlations"
    Ed has turned the flammable gas off.
    I will have him turn the isobutane and alcohol system back. Someone will
    need to contact Ed on Tuesday to turn it off we we are not aloed to run.
    dana
    
    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "Brendan Fox" <fox@drax.Colorado.EDU>
    To: <brahms-l@bnl.gov>
    Sent: Friday, May 23, 2003 2:00 PM
    Subject: Re: end of brahms+phobos pp run
    
    
    >
    > Hi Dana and Ed,
    >
    > Can we keep the isobutane flowing until Monday?  I would like to see the
    > machine prove that there is a significant improvement in luminosity before
    we
    > shut down BRAHMS.  Let me know ... thanks ...
    >
    > ... brendan
    >
    > From: Flemming Videbaek <fvidebaek@optonline.net>
    > Subject: Re: end of brahms+phobos  pp run
    > Reply-to: Flemming Videbaek <videbaek@bnl.gov>
    >
    > Hi Brendan,
    >
    > you can talk to Dana/Ed baker about the flowing of the isobutane. That is
    is
    > only real thing that would take time to bring back up anything else is
    fast -
    > I do not like the way it was handled too, but thinks this is one (I think
    > Gerry also found it was the preoper way to proceed)  . I am at home with
    > people working on the house (kitchen floor)
    >
    > Flemming
    > ------------------------------------------------------
    > Flemming Videbaek
    > Physics Department
    > Brookhaven National Laboratory
    >
    > tlf: 631-344-4106
    > fax 631-344-1334
    > e-mail: videbaek@bnl.gov
    >
    > ----- Original Message -----
    > From: "Brendan Fox" <fox@drax..Colorado.EDU>
    > To: <brahms-l@bnl.gov>
    > Sent: Friday, May 23, 2003 12:55 PM
    > Subject: Re: end of brahms+phobos pp run
    >
    >
    > |
    > | Hi Flemming,
    > |
    > | Can we wait a day or so before we put the experiment in stand-by mode?
    I
    > | think that this decision sucks (especially the manner in which it was
    made)
    > | and would like to see if, over the next day or so, the machine can
    deliver the
    > | luminosity before we consider this decision to be final.  What do you
    think?
    > |
    > | - brendan
    > |
    > | On Fri, 23 May 2003, Flemming Videbaek wrote:
    > |
    > | > Dear collaborator,
    > | >
    > | > unfortunately I have to bring you one more change in schedule, this
    not being a good one for Brahms and Phobos. Last
    > night we were summoned to a meeting this morning at 9.30 (see encl.
    e-mail); I managed to get a message to the
    > institutional reps on the issue.
    > | >
    > | > At the meeting T.Roser summarized the evidence for possible higher lum
    with ferwer collisions points, for most stores
    > there is a 20-50% difference for bunches colliding ferwer times, albeit
    > | > not for all. T.Kirk commented that the aim as well as justification
    for the last extension was the possibility to do a
    > delta-G measurement in Star and Phenix and he as Associated Lab director
    for RHIC has the goal the maximize the good
    > outcome for this physics.In addition the expected fiscal funding for next
    year as well as needed upgrades to AGS for
    > polarization will make it most likely there will only beam one beam
    species (au) next year with no pp running
    > | >
    > | >  Based on the input from the machine people (and probably also from
    Star+Phenix) would like to go to a two collisions
    > interection only mode as soon as possible.
    > | >
    > | > First I and then Wit Busza preseneted arguments for the the phyics
    that would not be done, and I as well
    > | > for the utterly chaotic way planning had been done.
    > | > Since of course his mind was made up ahead of time I am quite sure the
    final decision was to collide at STAR and
    > Phenix only following the next store.
    > | > I requested that T.kirk send a letter/ e-mail to all collaboration on
    the decision and what physics would not be
    > completed
    > | >
    > | > This thus is the end of the run-3 at RHIC; shifts are cancelled from
    ~noon time, and the experiment will be secured
    > (stop isobutane, turn down HV etc).
    > | >
    > | > regards
    > | >     Flemming.
    > | >
    > | > ------------------------------------------------------
    > | > Flemming Videbaek
    > | > Physics Department
    > | > Brookhaven National Laboratory
    > | >
    > | > tlf: 631-344-4106
    > | > fax 631-344-1334
    > | > e-mail: videbaek@bnl.gov
    > | >
    > | >
    > | > enc 1/
    > | >
    > | > --------------
    > | >
    > | > Flemming and Wit,
    > | >
    > | > As you know there seems to be strong evidence that reducing the number
    of
    > | > collision points in RHIC will lead to a substantial increase in the
    > | > luminosity for the remaining experiments. Tom Kirk has asked me to
    organize
    > | > a meeting for 9:30 tomorrow morning in Derek's office to discuss the
    impact
    > | > of an early termination for BRAHMS and/or PHOBOS.
    > | >
    > | > The termination could come as early as tomorrow.
    > | >
    > | > sorry for the short notice. Please send a representative if you cannot
    be
    > | > there or be available for a discussion at 9:30 by telephone.
    > | >
    > | > best regards,
    > | > Phil-
    > | >
    > |
    >
    >
    >
    


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri May 23 2003 - 15:01:25 EDT