<div><br></div><div><a>From: "O. A. Rondon" <or@virginia.edu><br>
To: Simonetta Liuti <sl4y@virginia.edu>, kk7t@virginia.edu, b1@jlab.org<br>
Cc: Karl Slifer <karl.slifer@unh.edu>, Donal Day <dbd@cms.mail.virginia.edu>, Patricia Solvignon <solvigno@jlab.org>, Narbe Kalantarians <narbe@jlab.org>, "J.P. Chen" <jpchen@jlab.org>, ellie@jlab.org, "Donald G. Crabb" <dgc3q@cms.mail.virginia.edu>, Dustin Keller <dustin@jlab.org><br>
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2013 19:33:06 -0400<br>
Subject: b1d</a></div><div><a><br>
Dear Simonetta and Kunal,<br>
<br>It was great to meet with you two and Dustin today, to discuss how to<br>
measure b1. Here are some items that you should find useful.<br>
<br>b1 wiki<br>
</a><a href="https://hallcweb.jlab.org/wiki/index.php/B1">https://hallcweb.jlab.org/wiki/index.php/B1</a><br>
<br>The talk slides I showed at the meeting are under "Relevant Publications"<br>
<br>The email attachment from Bob Jaffe replying to our question about sec.<br>
6 of his paper with Hoodbhoy and Manohar is on my b1 folder on twist<br>
<a href="https://twist.phys.virginia.edu/~or/b1/">https://twist.phys.virginia.edu/~or/b1/</a><br>
<br>look for "b1-b2.pdf", but feel free to explore any and all items there.<br>
Our question, as formulated by Patricia, and Jaffe's reply are at the<br>
end of this message.<br>
<br>There is a b1 mailing list that you can subscribe to, see the wiki. I'm<br>
copying this message to the mailing list. All interested collaborators<br>
should subscribe, and future mailings be done preferably using the list.<br>
<br>Thank you and looking forward to our collaboration on this project,<br>
<br>Oscar<br>
<br>> --------------<br>
> On Nov 30, 2010, at 5:16 PM, Robert L. Jaffe wrote:<br>
><br>
>> Dear Patricia,<br>
>><br>
>> Attached is a .tex/.pdf file that addresses your question. There<br>
> certainly is a difference between a state polarized transverse to the<br>
> beam and one polarized longitudinal to it. I hope the notes are useful.<br>
>> Bob<br>
>> <b1-b2.pdf><br>
>> Robert L. Jaffe<br>
>> Morningstar Professor of Physics and MacVicar Faculty Fellow<br>
><br>
><br>
>> On Nov 30, 2010, at 12:47 PM, Patricia SOLVIGNON wrote:<br>
>><br>
>>> Dear Bob.<br>
>>><br>
>>> Because I have been used to think in the case of spin-1/2 and the<br>
> double-polarization<br>
>>> measurement, I am still a bit confused about the right measurement<br>
> method of b1. From<br>
>>> section 6 of your paper with P. Hoodbhoy and A. Manohar (Nuc. Phys<br>
> B312, 571(1989)),<br>
>>> the variable H appears in both sigma_para and sigma_perp.<br>
>>> My understanding is that H (= the target spin projection along the<br>
> beam) is equal to +/-1<br>
>>> in the longitudinal case and to 0 in the transverse case. If that is<br>
> true:<br>
>>> sigma_para = sigma_perp = kin_fact *sigma_mott*(F1 - 1/3 b1)<br>
>>><br>
>>> and we need either to perform a measurement of F1d from an<br>
> unpolarized target at the<br>
>>> same kinematics as for the measurement on the longitudinally<br>
> polarized target or use a<br>
>>> model from F1d with the uncertainty that comes along.<br>
>>><br>
>>> The submission of the proposal is due tomorrow so I want to make sure<br>
> I understood the<br>
>>> formalism for a measurement of b1.<br>
>>><br>
>>> Thank you for your help.<br>
>>><br>
>>> Best regards,<br>
>>> Patricia<br>
<br><br>
<br>
<br><br>
<br>
<br><br>
<br>
<br>---------- Forwarded message ----------<br>
From: <a href="mailto:b1-request@jlab.org">b1-request@jlab.org</a><br>
To: <br>
Cc: <br>
Date: <br>
Subject: confirm 94e2fe0a0dd926e0b4209c026f4eca72e653dc1e<br>
If you reply to this message, keeping the Subject: header intact,<br>
Mailman will discard the held message. Do this if the message is<br>
spam. If you reply to this message and include an Approved: header<br>
with the list password in it, the message will be approved for posting<br>
to the list. The Approved: header can also appear in the first line<br>
of the body of the reply.</div>