<html><head></head><body><br><div><br><div>Begin forwarded message:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><div><b>From: </b>Matt <<a href="mailto:mbellis@stanford.edu">mbellis@stanford.edu</a>><br></div><div><b>Date: </b>April 14, 2010 8:27:53 PM EDT<br></div><div><b>To: </b><a href="mailto:mamaryan@odu.edu">mamaryan@odu.edu</a><br></div><div><b>Cc: </b>Heghine Seraydaryan <<a href="mailto:heghines@jlab.org">heghines@jlab.org</a>>, <a href="mailto:g12@jlab.org">g12@jlab.org</a>, Paul Eugenio <<a href="mailto:eugenio@fsu.edu">eugenio@fsu.edu</a>>, Larry Weinstein <<a href="mailto:lweinste@odu.edu">lweinste@odu.edu</a>><br></div><div><b>Subject: </b><b>Re: [G12] Momentum corrections</b><br></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div>Hi all,</div><div><br></div><div> Paul, this may get bounced from the g12 mailing list, as I am emailing from a different address than from which I originally subscribed. Could you please forward it to that list as a record of this conversation. </div>
<div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote">As for the Bellis analysis, I believe his work was shown to<br>
have some problems that were not addressed, including<br>
the fact that his proton momenta were not sensible, etc.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div> That is absolutely not true, Moskov, and you are trying to either misrepresent my work or you are willfully ignoring *multiple* discussions we had on this matter and which is documented in emails and on the Wiki. There were *never* any issues with any mass plots or cuts that were made in my analysis. There was *one* independent set of plots that were made in order to compare other momentum distributions to ODU's work and the issue was with a definition of transverse momentum in Mike William's 4vec class. This has been gone over *MANY* times with you and Larry and Igor and others and it was *NEVER* used to make any cuts on the analysis. </div>
<div><br></div><div> There were *NEVER* any *physics* issues raised with my analysis, Moskov, though this is not the first time that you have tried to misrepresent that work. I am disappointed that after we had a similar email conversation last year on this *very same issue*, that you try to pull this. I have always been as transparent as possible in every step of that analysis and those discussions.</div>
<div><br></div><div> I have no idea what the ODU group is doing now, so I cannot comment on it. But do not think that a plotting issue that was solved *days after* we showed it at a meeting, in any way discredits the work that I did, nor that it strengthens any of the previous ODU analysis. </div>
<div><br></div><div>-- </div></div>-- <br>----------------------------<br>Matt Bellis<br>Stanford University<br>(SLAC office) 650-926-4392<br>(cell) 412-310-4586<br>----------------------------<br>
</blockquote></div><br><div>
<div><div><div>--</div><div>Prof. Paul Eugenio</div><div>Florida State University</div><div>Department of Physics</div><div>Tallahassee, Florida, USA 32306</div><div><br></div><div>(850) 644-2585</div><div><a href="mailto:eugenio@fsu.edu">eugenio@fsu.edu</a></div><div><br></div></div></div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
</div>
<br></body></html>