[Clascomment] OPT-IN:Absorption of the omega and phi Mesons in Nuclei

[Reinhard Schumacher]

Dear Mike et al.

Here are my comments on your draft paper \"Absorption of the omega and
phi mesons in nuclei.\"  I think it is in good shape, and I think the
result will receive attention, since there is an interesting divergence
between CLAS results and results at other labs.

My comments are keyed to the line numbers in the version with all the
co-author names:

75: Abstract:  I would reverse the two clauses of the first sentence.
That puts the physics first and the circumstances of getting the data
second, which I think is better for making an initial impact on the
reader.

103-105: There is something weird in the  grammar of this sentence.
You need \"broadness...increase\" or \"broadening...increasing\" to be
consistent, but neither is what  I think you are trying to say.  How
about \"...width corresponds to THE EFFECT of the meson-nucleon
INTERACTION.\"? 

122: Physics question:  Can you explain better why the collisional
width is related to the meson-baryon cross section?  That is, your
sigma_VN is the TOTAL cross section, which includes, therefore, the
elastic piece of the cross section.  But the elastic piece, I would
think, does not change the width of the state.  In other words, can
you add a sentence or two about the \"low-density theorem by Dover et
al. that you reference.

176: instead of \'deviations\' I would use \'variations\'

158 - 224: You have an disconcerting habit of switching from past
tense to present tense and back again.  I think this part of the paper
where you describe the experiment and the discuss the analysis would
\"read\" better if it were consistently in PAST tense.  Switch to
present tense when you are describing the results.

294:  Physics question:  it may be wrong to say that rho-omega mixing
plays no role of one is looking in the pi0-gamma channel rather than
the e+e- channel.  In quantum mechanics, there is no such thing as
different widths/lineshapes in different channels.  If there is a
mechanism that broadens the width of a state in one decay channel, is
it not thereby broadened in all channels?  Please clarify this for me.

That\'s all the questions/suggestions I have for now.  Looking forward
to the next draft.

Regards,
Reinhard.