[Clascomment] OPT-IN: Differential cross sections and polarization observables from the CLAS Kâ photoproduction and search for new Nâ states

[Igor Strakovsky]

Dear Viktor,

I am talking about our piN PWA results and misinterpretation which Volker
and primary authors made in this draft.

Cheers, Igor

-----
Igor Strakovsky, SAID INS The George Washington University
Tel: 571-553-8344,Skype: igors1945_2, Fax: 202-994-3001
Cell: 703-728-5627, Emails: igor at gwu.edu, igor at jlab.org

On Sun, May 22, 2016 at 6:51 PM, Viktor Mokeev <mokeev at jlab.org> wrote:

>  Hi Igor',
>
>  I want to pay your attention to the CLAS paper on exclusive pi^+n
> elerctroproduction (attached):
>
> Measurements of ep→e′π+n
> at W = 1.6 - 2.0 GeV and extraction of nucleon resonance electrocouplings
> at CLAS
> CLAS Collaboration (K. Park (Jefferson Lab & Old Dominion U.) et al.). Nov
> 30, 2014. 21 pp.
> Published in Phys.Rev. C91 (2015) 045203
> JLAB-PHY-15-4
> DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevC.91.045203
> e-Print: arXiv:1412.0274 [nucl-ex] |
>
> In the published in this paper analysis of pi^+n electroproduction CLAS
> data, the N(1710)1/2+ resonance was seen in at least in 4 of 5 bins of Q^2.
> Its electrocouplings were extracted successfully and they are different
> from zero at least in 4 Q^2 bins.
>
>  Successfull description of the CLAS pi^+n data in four bins of Q^2 with
> the same Q^2-independent hadronic parameters of N(1710)1/2+ is the strong
> and almost model independent evidence for this state existence.
>
>    Best Regards,
>                         Victor
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Igor Strakovsky" <igor at gwu.edu>
> To: "clasmbr" <clasmbr at jlab.org>, "clascomment" <clascomment at jlab.org>,
> "Kenneth Hicks" <hicks at ohio.edu>, "Viktor Mokeev" <mokeev at jlab.org>,
> jprice at csudh.edu, tangwei at jlab.org
> Sent: Sunday, May 22, 2016 6:02:18 PM
> Subject: OPT-IN:  Differential cross sections and polarization observables
> from the CLAS  Kâ photoproduction and search for new Nâ states
>
> Dear Ken, Alexey, Eberhard, Viktor, and Andrey,
>
> Thank you very much for a good piece of physics.  It is difficult to write
> comments after Dan Carman.
>
> My main concern is not about physics.  I do not think that Alexey can be
> the first author of the CLAS experimental paper. He did nothing for
> analysis, did not take shifts and so
> on.   Sorry, Alexey, nothing personal.  My suggestion is that Ken
> (corresponding author)
> or his student must be the first.
>
> Then back to physics...
>
> 1) pg 1, left, 1st phrase: "The threshold...": I do not think that this
> phrase does make any sense - please rephrase it
>
> 2) pg 1, left 3rd phrase: This statement is wrong.  Then I disagreed with
> the Volker's position which is a misinterpretation of our GW SAID results
> (latest PWA of piN elastic scattering data).  Our position is solid - there
> is no evidence to support P11(1710).
> You have to rephrase or skip it.
>
> That is all by now,
> Igor
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/clascomment/attachments/20160522/a41ca893/attachment-0001.html>