Hi Djam, I would just make the comment that Nch ~ 4600+-400 (-4.7 < eta < 4.7) + 200? outside and Phobos says 5000+-200 for total, but we also supposedly have some 2-300 net-p+netK outside our acceptance... It would be nice to put the Phobos data on the same plot if available. I think you have done a great job and it is nice to see that the data used to form different dN/dy points at forward rapidity in the dN/dy plot when related in the dN/deta (Figure 2 and Figure 15) seems to agree well. For figure 11 the agreement is less nice, but it loks ok, and anyway it is a tricky thing as you say and I guess that there is also not a one to one correspondance between your y-pT and eta-pT histogram. Cheers, Peter On Tue, 4 May 2004, Djamel Ouerdane wrote: > Hello, > > I've written a quick analysis note on a comparison dNch/deta (obtained > from MA and BB) and dN/dy (obtained from MRS and FS data by me and Peter). > There's been some concern about large discrepancies but those turn out to > be not that large. > > Check out BAN 50 there: > http://www.sdcc.bnl.gov/brahms/private/AnNotes/Index.html > > > Remeber also the following, noted by Ian to a few of us: > > Nch ~ 4600 (maybe a bit more from eta = -inf to +inf) > N(pi+ + pi-) = 1780 + 1760 > N(K+ + K-) = 290 + 240 > N(p + pbar) = (75 + 85) + 85 (75 = 95% of 79 - 0-5% centrality) > so Nch = 4315, i.e. 6% lower than 4600, not that bad. > > Ciao > Djam > > -- :-) --------------------------- )-: Peter H L Christiansen pchristi@nbi.dk / (+41)764870425 :-D --------------------------- \-: _______________________________________________ Brahms-l mailing list Brahms-l@lists.bnl.gov http://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/brahms-lReceived on Tue May 4 10:19:20 2004
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue May 04 2004 - 10:19:36 EDT