[b1_ana] draft V3

[Karl Slifer]

Hi Dustin,

Lets put aside the actual method for a moment, and discuss the technique
later, if this is fruitful....

My basic question is : if we flipped 10 times a day and ran each point for
10 days, that gives 100 "buckets" or "slugs" of data.  So I think a 1% (or
10^-2) drift over this 10 days would be suppresed to a 10^(-3) effect.
 This is difficult, but I think doable.  Or do we need to have a 1000 slugs
in order to reduce to 10^-4?

-Karl




On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 8:19 PM, Dustin Keller <dustin at jlab.org> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> It is possible to use an additional loop to annihilate polarization, it is
> similar to AFP, but different, not needing to go to negative polarization.
> This would require an additional loop most likely on the outside of the
> cup.
>
> dustin
>
> On Sat, 4 May 2013, Karl Slifer wrote:
>
> > PPS : please note that in the overhead I assumed we would switch
> > polarization states twice per day and I assumed 2 hours each time.  I
> think
> > this would imply about 10 "buckets" of polarized counts and 10 "buckets"
> of
> > unpolarized counts for each of our 3 x-points.   It is our dominant
> > overhead at 5 days total.
> >
> > I think we may have a little room to move here.  Please see the attached
> > plot from g2p data, where we depolarized the (proton) target by pumping
> > with microwaves in less than 4 minutes.  The pump up is also very fast
> with
> > the new fridge and blasting the wattage of the new microwave cavity the
> > pump up is about 30 mins to the negative state.  I think polarizing in
> the
> > positive state is usually a little faster.
> >
> > So, perhaps we can be a little more aggressive in our overhead estimate
> :5
> > or 10 mins for depolarizing and 30 mins to polarize.  That would give us
> > the flexibility to increase the number of "buckets" to say 10 or 12 total
> > per day.  It will be a large overhead (about 12 days just for this), but
> oh
> > well.  Would this be sufficient to control the known drifts?
> >
> > A little more radical would be to explore the idea of flipping from
> > positive to negative tensor polarization rapidly with an AFP type flip,
> > which I believe is near instantaneous.  This is essentially what happens
> > with hole burning anyway I think.
> >
> > -Karl
> >
> >
> >
> > ---
> > Karl J. Slifer
> > Assistant Professor
> > University of New Hampshire
> > Telephone : 603-722-0695
> >
> >
> > On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 6:47 PM, Karl Slifer <karl.slifer at unh.edu> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Hi All,
> >>
> >> I've posted the updated draft at
> >>
> >> https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/59933793/tensor_b1_v03.pdf
> >>
> >> There is some lagtime for implementation, but I think this reflects
> pretty
> >> well where our discussion was about 24 hours ago.  However, we still
> need:
> >>
> >> -updated rates/kin plots from Ellie or Patricia and values for the table
> >>
> >> -some consensus on how to address Steve's comments.
> >>
> >> It seems we have three options with time running short.
> >>
> >> 1) List all possible factors that drift with time and atleast sketch a
> >> plan to deal with them.
> >>
> >> 2) go back to difference of counts.
> >>
> >> 3) Cancel submission and work on this for next PAC.
> >>
> >> I lean to the first, Oscar leans to the second.  I'd very much like to
> >> find some consensus on this.  Am I the only one still nerding it up in
> >> front of my computer on this beautiful spring day?
> >>
> >> -Karl
> >>
> >> PS : If anyone makes suggestions for changes I would very much
> appreciate
> >> that they be in a form that I can put into the document quickly.
> >>
> >> ---
> >> Karl J. Slifer
> >> Assistant Professor
> >> University of New Hampshire
> >> Telephone : 603-722-0695
> >>
> >
> _______________________________________________
> b1_ana mailing list
> 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/20130504/8829385b/attachment.html