Date: Fri Dec 05 2003 - 04:57:40 EST
Hi Michael > One could compare different energies by look at Feynman X. Since you > have the complete set of spectra if might be possible to construct this > from your current results. I looked at this once and just redid the plots. One shows xF=2*mt*TMath::SinH(rap)/cmEnergy in y-p_T to make clear that we can't just convert our spectra to this. The other plot shows dN/dy at AGS (I know that NA49 has preliminary dN/dx_F), SPS, RHIC converted from dN/dy to dN/dx_F using x_F = 2*m/cmEnergy*TMath::SinH(rap) and dN/dx_F = dN/dy * dy/dx_F with dy/dxF = cmEnergy/2/m/TMath::CosH(rap) I'm not sure exactly what we learn. It seems to me that it suggests that transparency is increasing from AGS to SPS to RHIC (Finally a mount RHIC;). > It would seem appropriate to also quote the NA44 results, Phys. Rev. C > 66, 044907 (2002). These are limited in rapidity but have very good PID. > By the way are ther no measurements of <dY> at the Bevelac or GSI? GSI has measured <dy> in Ni-Ni collisions and that compares to Si+Al (802) and S+S (NA35) and shown that models that reproduce their results also predicts Au+Au <dy>_rel similar to AGS and SPS, see for example in Flemmings winter workshop paper or my thesis. To compare with Na49 results we have to show values with feed-down correction and for NA44 that is : p(y_cm~-0.8+-0.2) = 27.3 +- 0.5 +- 5.3 p-bar (same) ~ 1.4 p(y_cm~-0.3+-0.3) = 28.5 +- 0.2 +- 4.6 p-bar (same) ~ 2.1 net-p ~ 26 +- 5 I once included those results in a smiliar plot and they were not so great.... They rather make the plot more confusing. I'm looking at your other suggestions. Thanks for the comments Peter -- :-) --------------------------- )-: Peter H L Christiansen @ NBI EMAIL : pchristi@nbi.dk OFFICE : Tb1@NBI (353 25269) HOME : Frimestervej 22, 1. tv PHONE : 35824930/40840492 :-D --------------------------- \-: _______________________________________________ Brahms-l mailing list Brahms-l@lists.bnl.gov http://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/brahms-l
