[Clascomment] OPT-IN: Data analysis techniques, differential cross sections and spin density matrix elements for the reaction gamma p -> phi p

[Biplab Dey]

Dear All,
Just a gentle reminder that our replies and latest draft have been posted here:

http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~biplabd/jlab/
If you have further questions, please let us know asap. We would like to finalize the submission draft by today.
Thank you,
-The authors



On Thursday, February 20, 2014 9:52 AM, Biplab Dey <biplabdey at yahoo.com> wrote:
 
Hi again, Reinhard,
>I've tried to address your comments as best as I could:
>http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~biplabd/jlab/
>I'm aware of the issue of garbled up plots in the printed versions. It would need going back and re-saving those plots as .eps (I think). I'm not in a position to do this right now, but I'll take care of this before the final publication. 
>-Biplab
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>On Wednesday, February 19, 2014 11:03 AM, Reinhard Schumacher <schumacher at cmu.edu> wrote:
> 
>Hello Biplab,
>>
>>    I read your comments on my comments.  Here is a second iteration on those comments, for the points where I still have a question.  
>>
>>Title: I still feel that the present title is still over-playing the fact that you did a lot of work on the analysis methods.  Every analysis is a lot of work, and unique in some way.   I would remove that first phrase.
>>
>>line 115: Its far from clear to me why you would let a referee
 dictate the content of 'your' paper.  There is no drawback to mentioning the other paper, and several things to gain.
>>
>>Eq 11:  ah, yes.   I see.
>>
>>line 529: Yes, I see the point, of course.  Perhaps you could rephrase the sentence "The dwindling phase space at higher MKK...."
>>
>>Fig 7:  I downloaded the paper again, and again got scrambled figure legends and labels for this and many other figures.  (???)
>>
>>line 1020: Just reread your sentence about a slow rise with energy of both B and C.  In Fig 31 B is falling and then flattening, and C is rising only if you ignore the most prominent feature of the distribution.  I think you have to qualify your statement.
>>
>>Fig 36:  I still stand by my previous comment, though I could be wrong...  The GJ frame is defined in the rest frame of the V, which is what your label indicates.  But you show the V as moving and the IP at rest. 
 You want to illustrate a V being created out of the collision of a gamma and the IP, don't you?
>>
>>Reinhard
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/clascomment/attachments/20140225/cd93196d/attachment.html