[b1_ana] slides

Mon Jun 17 11:05:59 EDT 2013

Minor point for slide Kinematics (the slides could still use numbers), although it doesn't change anything of the range, I've included two re-labelled plots for Q^2 and W that say "HMS/SMHS Central Value" instead of "Input for HMS/SHMS", and also raise the W cut above the points.

Take care,
Ellie

________________________________
From: kjslifer at gmail.com [kjslifer at gmail.com] on behalf of Karl Slifer [karl.slifer at unh.edu]
Sent: Monday, June 17, 2013 1:42 AM
To: Long, Elena
Cc: b1_ana at jlab.org
Subject: Re: [b1_ana] slides

Hi all,

Here's a new draft of the slides incorporating Ellie's and Dustin's work, and addressing (hopefully) most of what we discussed on Friday.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/59933793/b1_pac40_rev1.ppt
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/59933793/b1_pac40_rev1.pdf

Please take a look.  Slides have to be submitted by 5:00 pm Monday.

I'm going to do another dry run at 11:00 am Monday.  If any non-locals want to participate, let me know and I'll set up a line.

thanks,

 Karl

---
Karl J. Slifer
Assistant Professor
University of New Hampshire
Telephone : 603-722-0695

On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 9:12 PM, Long, Elena <Elena.Long at unh.edu<mailto:Elena.Long at unh.edu>> wrote:
Good evening,

I haven't finished up all the changes from Friday's discussion, but I did include Dustin's slides in the same format as the rest of the talk, and began updates from Friday. Current versions can be found at http://nuclear.unh.edu/~elong/analysis_files/2013-06-16/

Take care,
Ellie

________________________________________
From: b1_ana-bounces at jlab.org<mailto:b1_ana-bounces at jlab.org> [b1_ana-bounces at jlab.org<mailto:b1_ana-bounces at jlab.org>] on behalf of Oscar  Rondon-Aramayo [or at cms.mail.virginia.edu<mailto:or at cms.mail.virginia.edu>]
Sent: Sunday, June 16, 2013 7:46 PM
To: b1_ana at jlab.org<mailto:b1_ana at jlab.org>
Subject: Re: [b1_ana] slides

The statistic gets worse as (20/12)^2, or (20/15)^2, so I think the smallest
Pzz we can mention is 15% (Pz ~ 44%).

i forgot to share the tech notes on ND3 polarization that Don sent me last
week, although I think they are the same ones we used for the proposal. The
field dependence is on p. 6 of the note on the research run in B28.

My bet is that at constant microwave power, ND3 Pz will be definitely higher
at 6.5 T than at 5 T. And remember that Pzz increases much faster than Pz,
above Pz = 45%, so a 10% Pz increase results in more than 20% Pzz increase.
So, even if Pz  increased by only 10% from 5 to 6.5 T, we would gain a lot.

Also there is FM modulation of the microwaves, which was used at SLAC, and I
think at JLab too, which, if I recall correctly, it at least slows down the
decay with dose.

Cheers,

Oscar

On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 22:50:54 +0000
  "Long, Elena" <Elena.Long at unh.edu<mailto:Elena.Long at unh.edu>> wrote:
> Good evening,
>
> Please see the attached plots for Pzz=15% and Pzz=12%
>
> Take care,
> Ellie
>
>
> ________________________________
>From: b1_ana-bounces at jlab.org<mailto:b1_ana-bounces at jlab.org> [b1_ana-bounces at jlab.org<mailto:b1_ana-bounces at jlab.org>] on behalf of Karl
>Slifer [karl.slifer at unh.edu<mailto:karl.slifer at unh.edu>]
> Sent: Sunday, June 16, 2013 5:03 PM
> To: Dustin Keller; ellie at jlab.org<mailto:ellie at jlab.org>; b1_ana at jlab.org<mailto:b1_ana at jlab.org>
> Subject: Re: [b1_ana] slides
>
>
> Hi Dustin,
>
> Thanks for the plots.  If Ellie can produce a 12% slide I'll include it as
>backup.  I suspect it will require reducing the number of x-points to 1 or
>2.
>
> Also, do you have the plot of ND3 pol versus B-field?  Are the existing
>cavities made for 7T or 7.5T?
>
> thanks,
>
> Karl
>
>
> ---
> Karl J. Slifer
> Assistant Professor
> University of New Hampshire
> Telephone : 603-722-0695<tel:603-722-0695>
>
>
> On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 3:33 PM, Dustin Keller
><dustin at jlab.org<mailto:dustin at jlab.org><mailto:dustin at jlab.org<mailto:dustin at jlab.org>>> wrote:
> Also in a side conversation with don he was
> highly recommending a backup slide that showed
> projection for 12-15% Pzz demonstrating that
> even with their down playing of the polarization
> the experiment can still work.  This is true for
> systematics being its only a 20/15 factor increase
> in the drift, probably around that with statistical
> uncertainty increase as well.
>
> dustin
>
>
> On Sat, 15 Jun 2013, Dustin Keller wrote:
>
> Here is some infor for the HB/tensor pol slides
>
> https://userweb.jlab.org/~dustin/work/TargetFigs/
>
>
>

_______________________________________________
b1_ana mailing list
b1_ana at jlab.org<mailto:b1_ana at jlab.org>
https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/b1_ana

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/b1_ana/attachments/20130617/de08563c/attachment-0001.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: q2.png
Type: image/png
Size: 206500 bytes
Desc: q2.png
Url : https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/b1_ana/attachments/20130617/de08563c/attachment-0002.png 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: w.png
Type: image/png
Size: 89603 bytes
Desc: w.png
Url : https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/b1_ana/attachments/20130617/de08563c/attachment-0003.png 