Re: deuterons etc..

From: Flemming Videbaek (videbaek@sgs1.hirg.bnl.gov)
Date: Fri Oct 18 2002 - 20:40:13 EDT

  • Next message: Ian Bearden: "RE: deuterons etc.."
    I just want to inject one observation based on the pp data. In pp there is a
    significant yield of deuterons - and in pp this MUST
    be from background, probably this is from the trigger counters+beam pipe-
    thus one should be very concerned about a similar
    contributions in Au+Au.
    I think it is not known how well geant describe deuterons from background -
    but I do not think this is small based on the pp results. I it also
    worthwhile to note that STAR did not present deuteron results but only
    anti-deuterons that are free from such contributions .
    
    I would think that the effect on deuterons due to absorbtion, etc roughly
    goes by p/2 i.e the effect for a given momentum deuteron is similar to that
    of a p/2 proton- this means that for p<1 GeV/c deuterons these corrections
    are large, nad one should not consider those. Thus any consideration should
    only look at p(d) > 1.2 GeV/c in my opinion.
    I looked briefly at the geant code from fluka,... and I do not  see any
    straight forward to include this in the simulation.
    One suggestion I have is that some-one contact one the of exp. at CERN that
    looked at anti-deuteron production at theta~0 - and I do not mean NA44 (I
    guess primarely beacase the comments from there seems not to give clues to
    this problem).
    
    Flemming
    
    
    
    
    
    
    ------------------------------------------------------
    Flemming Videbaek
    Physics Department
    Brookhaven National Laboratory
    
    tlf: 631-344-4106
    fax 631-344-1334
    e-mail: videbaek@bnl.gov
    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "Jens Jørgen Gaardhøje" <gardhoje@nbi.dk>
    To: <brahms-l@bnl.gov>
    Sent: Friday, October 18, 2002 5:43 PM
    Subject: Fw: deuterons etc..
    
    
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > > Dear friends,
    > >
    > > The problem at hand that Marco is struggling with concerns estimating
    the
    > > corrections to p, pbar, d and anti-d in view of
    > > correcting the raw measured B_2 and B_anti-2 derived from the basic
    yields
    > > of these particles after acceptance correction etc.
    > > All for the MRS and for now at 90 deg.
    > >
    > > Let me try to summarize my understanding of these corrections and of
    their
    > > relative importances for the sake of discussion.
    > > All input is welcome.
    > >
    > > The experimental quantity B_A is proportional to the ratio  (dN_A/dp_A)
    /
    > > (dN_p/dp_p)**A, neglecting energy dep. prefactors.
    > > Thus is follows directly from the measured yields of identified
    particles
    > > after correction for geometrical acceptance, contamination from
    > > secondary particles (produced and due to decays), absorption (in
    material
    > > between the collision vertex and the final PID detector) and decay
    losses
    > > (not applicable here).
    > >
    > > Production contribution:
    > > to protons:
    > > These can be ejected from the beam pipe and produced in secondary
    > reactions
    > > with other detectors, magnets etc... They can originate from knock-out
    > > reactions on nuclei or from pair production in a dense medium. Both pi,
    K,
    > > and p (and their antiparticles) can contribute to this. Thus the effect
    > can
    > > be simulated by generating particles in the MC according to spectra
    > > distributions with slopes and yields close to those which we have
    measured
    > > in the MRS.
    > > to deuterons:
    > > I would expect that there is a finite (but small) contribution to the
    > > deuteron yields from knock out from very light nuclei (mainly the Be
    > pipe).
    > > The energy required to produce a d and d-bar pair (4GeV) is so large
    that
    > > the yield from this source must be vanishing.
    > > to antiprotons:
    > > since there are not antiprotons present in the material surrounding the
    > > experiment the only contribution can be pair production.. this requires
    at
    > > least 2 GeV of primary energy, thus the effect must be relatively much
    > > smaller than for protons.
    > > to antideuterons:
    > > Since there is no knock out possible, the only contribution is from
    > > pairproduction. It is presumably of exactly the same magnitude as for d.
    > >
    > > Decay (feed down) contributions:
    > > to protons:
    > > These originate mainly from the decay of baryonic resonances (hyperons
    > > etc..). STAR has measured the Lambda yield (Lamda/p=1/2 ?). The
    > contribution
    > > from protons from such decays in our acceptance needs to be estimated.
    > This
    > > may be the most important contribution to the B2 corrections.
    > > to antiprotons:
    > > Similar. Star has measured antilambda/lambda (= 3/4 ?).
    > > to deuterons and antideuterons:
    > > unimportant. Only source I could think of is fragmentation of heavier
    (and
    > > rarer) clusters.
    > >
    > > Absorbtion contributions:
    > > to protons:
    > > absorption in pipe and in air mostly.
    > > to deuterons:
    > > idem. The main effect is presumably the larger cross section of the
    > > deuteron. Some estimate of this can be optained by looking in the review
    > of
    > > part. physics p. 208 and following. At E_p > 1Gev the pd cross section
    is
    > a
    > > factor of two larger than for pn collisions. So roughly the deuterons is
    > > twice the size of the nucleon - not surprisingly.
    > > to antiprotons:
    > > significant contribution due to absorbtion in the pipe and in air (at
    low
    > > momenta)
    > > to antideuterons:
    > > the absorbtion contribution should resemble that for antiprotons, but
    with
    > a
    > > higher cross section. I would expect that for large antideuteron
    energies
    > > ( > 1 GeV) the absorption is twice that for antiprotons (in relative
    > terms).
    > > At lower energies the Coulomb interaction plays a dominant role. But, a
    > > reasonable approximation is probably still to take the antiproton
    > absorbtion
    > > and multiply by two (for comparable CM energies) since the neutron does
    > not
    > > contribute to the total charge.
    > >
    > > All of these corrections are momentum dependent, i.e. dependent on the
    > input
    > > momentum of the particles.
    > >
    > > Since we have a good Monte Carlo description of the experiment, the
    > natural
    > > course of action seems to me to create a full calculation with a mix of
    > the
    > > approximately correct yields and spectrum slopes of the original
    particles
    > > and antiparticles, letting decays be operational, and then for each
    > particle
    > > type (p, d, pbar, dbar) of interest to take the ratio of the input
    > spectrum
    > > and the accepted/reconstructed spectrum after PID in TOFW. This results
    in
    > > the momentum dependent correction factors to be applied to the spectra
    > > before calculating the B2. As mentioned above the antideuterons present
    a
    > > problem, but I would probably apply the antiproton correction up to 0.5
    > GeV
    > > ( the antiproton dominates the Coulomb part) and then twice that at
    higher
    > > energies (above 1GeV).
    > >
    > > This could either be done with a mix of thermal spectra or with a large
    > > HIJING sample of events (we know that HIJING is quite OK at
    mid-rapidity).
    > > HIJING events are probably too small to allow for a reasonable d study.
    > >
    > > hope this is of some use
    > > cheers
    > > jj
    > >
    > > ____________________________________________________________
    > > Jens Jørgen Gaardhøje, Assoc. Prof., Dr. Sc.
    > > Niels Bohr Institute, Blegdamsvej 17, 2100 Copenhagen, Denmark.
    > > Tlf: (+45) 35 32 53 09, secr. (+45) 35 32 52 09, Fax: (+45) 35 32 50 16.
    > > UNESCO Natl. Comm., secr. (+45) 33 92 52 16.
    > > Email: gardhoje@nbi.dk.
    > > ____________________________________________________________
    > >
    > >
    > > ----- Original Message -----
    > > From: <murray@comp.tamu.edu>
    > > To: <brahms-dev-l@bnl.gov>
    > > Sent: Friday, October 18, 2002 12:23 AM
    > > Subject: Re: deuterons in brag
    > >
    > >
    > > >    Can one not take the approach that if the dbar hits anything hard
    it
    > > > will split up into an nbar and pbar. Thus one could create a dbar in
    > > > GEANT and then check everytime GUHADR if it is scheduled to have a
    > > > hadronic interaction. At that point one could kill it and transform
    into
    > > > a pbar and nbar.
    > > >   Alternatively one can do the analysis separely for dbars and nbars
    > > > at least when you are out of the magnetic fields.
    > > >                Michael
    > > >
    > > > Quoting Flemming Videbaek <videbaek@sgs1.hirg.bnl.gov>:
    > > >
    > > > > Hi
    > > > > To the best of my knowledge anti-deuterons are not defined in geant
    !
    > > > > One can certainly define a particle being a anti-deuteron, and one
    can
    > > make
    > > > > it behave properly in regard
    > > > > to multiple scattering, energy loss and tracking - but NOT for
    > hadronic
    > > > > integraction (and absorbtion) which
    > > > > requires a proper interface to the tracking part of hadronic
    > > interaction.
    > > > > Good but tough problem.
    > > > >
    > > > > Flemming'
    > > > > ------------------------------------------------------
    > > > > Flemming Videbaek
    > > > > Physics Department
    > > > > Brookhaven National Laboratory
    > > > >
    > > > > tlf: 631-344-4106
    > > > > fax 631-344-1334
    > > > > e-mail: videbaek@bnl.gov
    > > > > ----- Original Message -----
    > > > > From: "Marco Germinario" <germina@hilux17.nbi.dk>
    > > > > To: "Flemming Videbaek" <videbaek@sgs1.hirg.bnl.gov>
    > > > > Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2002 4:35 PM
    > > > > Subject: Re: deuterons in brag
    > > > >
    > > > >
    > > > > >
    > > > > > Hi Flemming,
    > > > > > I've been looking at the Geant manual, and the deuteron number is
    > > 45.Th
    > > > > > e problem is I can't find out how to throw antideuterons,and how
    to
    > > > > > rethreive them,if f ex i want to find the ratio between thrown and
    > > > > > accepted antideuterons. And at which point I should issue the
    > command
    > > > > > cont/print part 0  ?
    > > > > > Thanks
    > > > > > Marco
    > > > > >
    > > > > >
    > > > > >
    > > > > >
    > > > > > On Tue, 15 Oct 2002, Flemming Videbaek wrote:
    > > > > >
    > > > > > > This kind of stuff can be looked up in the Geant html
    > description -
    > > or
    > > > > when
    > > > > > > running brag
    > > > > > > issue an cont/print part 0 that will print all the particles
    that
    > > geant
    > > > > > > knows of.
    > > > > > > Deuteron are '42'
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------
    > > > > > > Flemming Videbaek
    > > > > > > Physics Department
    > > > > > > Brookhaven National Laboratory
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > tlf: 631-344-4106
    > > > > > > fax 631-344-1334
    > > > > > > e-mail: videbaek@bnl.gov
    > > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
    > > > > > > From: "Marco Germinario" <germina@hilux03.nbi.dk>
    > > > > > > To: <brahms-dev-l@bnl.gov>
    > > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2002 2:36 PM
    > > > > > > Subject: deuterons in brag
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > I'm making some knock out simulations for the beam pipe in
    > > brag,and
    > > > > have
    > > > > > > > to look at protons and
    > > > > > > > deuterons produced, vs pt.Does someone know which is the id
    > number
    > > > > for
    > > > > > > > deuterons,if brag take it into account,or if some special
    > > procedure
    > > > > before
    > > > > > > > to launch the simulation has to be taken?
    > > > > > > > Thanks,
    > > > > > > > Marco
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > --
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > >                              Marco Germinario
    > > > > > >
      --------------------------------------------------
    > > > > > > >                University address    : Personal address
    > > > > > > >                                      :
    > > > > > > >                Niels Bohr Institute  : Noerre Alle' 75,518
    > > > > > > >          Blegdamesvej 17,Ta-2  : Egmont kollegium
    > > > > > > >                Copenhagen, Danmark   : 2100 Copenhagen
    > > > > > > >                Mail: germina@nbi.dk  : Danmark
    > > > > > > >                Tlf : + 45 35325305   : Tlf: +45 82320518
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > >                               Mob: +45 26720446
    > > > > > >
      ---------------------------------------------------
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > >
    > > > > >
    > > > > > --
    > > > > >
    > > > > >                              Marco Germinario
    > > > > >              --------------------------------------------------
    > > > > >                University address    : Personal address
    > > > > >                                      :
    > > > > >                Niels Bohr Institute  : Noerre Alle' 75,518
    > > > > >          Blegdamesvej 17,Ta-2  : Egmont kollegium
    > > > > >                Copenhagen, Danmark   : 2100 Copenhagen
    > > > > >                Mail: germina@nbi.dk  : Danmark
    > > > > >                Tlf : + 45 35325305   : Tlf: +45 82320518
    > > > > >
    > > > > >                               Mob: +45 26720446
    > > > > >              ---------------------------------------------------
    > > > > >
    > > > >
    > > >
    > > >
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > -------------------------------------------------
    > > > This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/
    > > >
    > > >
    > >
    > >
    > >
    >
    >
    


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Oct 18 2002 - 20:37:42 EDT