[Clas12_verystrange] [EXTERNAL] Re: FW: Preoparation for RGA jeopardy

[Volker Crede]

Igor,

I am not sure what you are trying to say, this is not a matter of opinion. Belle did publish on the topic of the Cascade(1620). If you would like (or not like) the peak to be a Cascade, is a different story. I agree that the peak is weird but they clearly see a structure. I also have my problems with this peak.

I like the fact that they published their observation since it demonstrates that the rest of the world is also interested in hyperon spectroscopy. And this makes studying this structure an important topic for us.

- Volker


On May 20, 2020, at 3:55 PM, Igor Strakovsky <igor at gwu.edu<mailto:igor at gwu.edu>> wrote:

Dear Volker,

I disagree with your position regarding Belle Xi(1620).  That is your personal opinion while CERN Courier punched
this result

My 2c


On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 3:27 PM Volker Crede <vcrede at fsu.edu<mailto:vcrede at fsu.edu>> wrote:
The statement that "No new data has emerged since the last proposal" is of course somewhat tricky and not entirely correct. I don’t think that ignoring GlueX is wise and the PAC members will be aware of first (preliminary) GlueX results. How do you react when they ask? The expectation of about 300 Cascade(1820) using existing RGA data compares with about 700 Cascade(1820) we currently observe in 2017 / 2018 GlueX data.

Belle has also published the observation of the poorly established Cascade(1620) peak and even announced a new triply-strange state.

I propose to remove this sentence, just point out that the planned measurements will be of high impact and highlight the prospects of studying hyperons in electroproduction.

- Volker


On May 20, 2020, at 3:00 PM, Eugene Pasyuk <pasyuk at jlab.org<mailto:pasyuk at jlab.org>> wrote:

I put this file on SharePoint  https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__jeffersonlab-2Dmy.sharepoint.com_-3Aw-3A_g_personal_pasyuk-5Fjlab-5Forg_Ea4pnYkUsPZOgm1jd9AP4woBGklEtENpFv25-5FJIgb5w48w-3Fe-3Dtbajhl&d=DwIGaQ&c=CJqEzB1piLOyyvZjb8YUQw&r=Al_946P6-ubaE-7RFYvgEQysg64CoWoS3uuDfTRxmjU&m=UKHRDZkHRpoNq6LofsIrVramGr7WA9tTBRftt6s2EWQ&s=nenXckZlZlMwjqPYXFQCwplejTzvUYAKh7JT-O8VlAw&e= <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://jeffersonlab-my.sharepoint.com/:w:/g/personal/pasyuk_jlab_org/Ea4pnYkUsPZOgm1jd9AP4woBGklEtENpFv25_JIgb5w48w?e=tbajhl__;!!PhOWcWs!igKIlW5cA7kWbgtKSi8MdemWSFP1TnOJatAXwsyjfbEtb7O_PLlYlLJfylK0vw$>
It should be editable for you. Let me know if it is not. You can edit it directly in your browser.

-Eugene

From: Clas12_verystrange <clas12_verystrange-bounces at jlab.org<mailto:clas12_verystrange-bounces at jlab.org>> On Behalf Of Lei Guo
Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2020 11:40
To: clas12_verystrange at jlab.org<mailto:clas12_verystrange at jlab.org>
Subject: Re: [Clas12_verystrange] [EXTERNAL] Re: FW: Preoparation for RGA jeopardy

Hi, Folks,

Thanks for the edit from Nick and Igor. Others we have some time to look at it please feel free to further edit the latest version from Igor. The initial plan is to give Marco something later this afternoon (5pm ish?). I assume we can work with Marco and further change it after that.

Cheers!

Lei


On May 20, 2020, at 9:14 AM, nicholas <nicholas at jlab.org<mailto:nicholas at jlab.org>> wrote:

Thank you Igor. Your last statement (point 5) should go under point 1, since it motivates the electroproduction measurement.

-N
_______________________________________________
Clas12_verystrange mailing list
Clas12_verystrange at jlab.org<mailto:Clas12_verystrange at jlab.org>
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/clas12_verystrange__;!!PhOWcWs!m_xXTuEGBKj0DRRNK1F065xsLcBZPaOY2vUKkBuNwXGa23ncRPpDj-Vt6TdBDg$

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/clas12_verystrange/attachments/20200520/1fd6b994/attachment-0002.html>