From: yin.zhongbao@fi.uib.no
Date: Tue Jun 24 2003 - 04:57:53 EDT
Dear Claus,
here is my comments on the draft.
1) In the abstract: "The lack of suppression..."
May we change to "The enhancement of ..."
2) In the first paragraph: "quark deconfinement, the quark-gluon plasma
(QGP)"
As I understand, quark deconfinment is not equal to QGP, be careful:)
"5GeV/fm³" should not be itlics. The same for "p+p" and "d+Au" in
somewhere else.
3) In the second paragraph: "... the original medium" is not clear for me.
4) In paragraph 3: I would suggest use $p_{T}$ instead of $p_{t}$ in the
whole paper.
5) In paragraph 5: "Simulation studies using GEANT shows..."
Do you know what the input to the GEANT simulation? May we include it
in this sentence.
"select the most central events (0-$\approx$25%)..."
May we just say: "select the most central events"? I guess you will
show data for different centrality bins for example 40-60% centrality.
6) In paragraph 7: "corresponding to pseudorapidities ($\eta = 0$ and
2.2)"
I think it maight be better without "()".
"The widtha of rapidity intervals..."
Could you change to "The width of pseudorapidity intervals..."?
"... been tuned to repoduce p+p collisions"
I guess you mean "to repoduce the invariant spectra for p+p
collisions".
7) In paragraph 8: "A useful way to compare the momentum spectra..."
I think it is better to use "... the transverse momentum spectra..."
A minor mistake in the last line. Use $N_{bin}$. The same for the
first line in the following paragraph. Use $R_{AA}$
8) In paragraph 9: "... a rise from about 0.2 in the range ... to a value
in the range ..."
I have difficulty to understand this sentence.
"... for the central collisions at, while they tends towards 1 ..."
... at what?
9) In paragraph 10: Minor mistake in the end of the first sentence: ")"
10) In the summary: "...for hadrons measured at two rapidities."
I would use "... for hadrons measured at two pseudorapidities."
"...i.e. those that have the largest participant volumes."
Be careful here. It is not the case for lower energy e.g. SPS. I mean
I would be mislead.
"... is tied to absorbtion..."
-->"... is tied to absorption..."
Well done, Claus.
Cheers,
Zhongbao
------
On Sun, 22 Jun 2003, Claus O. E. Jorgensen wrote:
>
> Dear Collaborators,
>
> I've updated the high pt paper draft. The changes are mainly of
> the language (thanks to J. Natowitz). I've added a bit and re-arranged
> the analysis and hardware section. Don't focus too much on the text
> describing the figures since this will be re-writtin when we have the
> final figures.
>
> The new draft is here:
>
> www.nbi.dk/~ekman/highpt/high-pt26.ps
> www.nbi.dk/~ekman/highpt/high-pt26.pdf
> www.nbi.dk/~ekman/highpt/high-pt26.tex
>
> Claus
>
>
--
-----------------------------------------------------
Zhongbao YIN Phone: +47-55-582792 (O)
Address: +47-55-276803 (H)
Fantoftveien 14G 466 E-mail:
5075 Bergen Yin.Zhongbao@fi.uib.no
------------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Jun 24 2003 - 04:58:30 EDT