From: Ian Bearden (bearden@nbi.dk)
Date: Wed Jun 25 2003 - 15:13:13 EDT
Hi all, One small note, the acceptance for h- is not 2-2.2, but more like 2.1-2.3 (Claus will correct me if I'm wrong.) I don't have any reason to believe that this will make any difference at all, but if we are going to do the work (where we evidently is Hiro, for this...) it should be just as easy to use the 'correct' cut. This should also be put into the draft, and the figures. More to the point of Hiro's mail: Do I see correctly that, at least according to HIJING there is no 'isospin effect'? Finally: Has anyone been able to find h- spectra vs eta from UA1? I found them, but only for the sqrt(s)=630GeV run. The reference is Phys. Lett. B 366, 434 (1996). Also, note the date of publication, which should make even us proud at how quickly we are moving! I will continue to search for UA1 data more applicable to our case, and would be very happy if anyone has any suggestions where to look. Cheers, Ian On onsdag, jun 25, 2003, at 20:37 Europe/Copenhagen, Hironori Ito wrote: > Hello. I just posted a web page > (http://pii3.brahms.bnl.gov/~hito/pp/UA1_Correction.html) correction > factor of UA1 to BRAHMS correction factor. I used the (almost) same > technique as Claus. (This is independent check.) The effect of using > average of h- and h+ instead of h- at forward rapidity is quite large > (factor of 2.5 at pt of 4 Gev/c). Also, an effect of colliding > different species (PN, NN, PP) are ploted. This effect seems to be > small upto 3Gev/c. After that, although the statistics is poor, there > seemed to be difference. > > Hiro > >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jun 25 2003 - 15:14:22 EDT