[Hybrid baryons] an update for the KL channel (Evgeny)

[golovach at jlab.org]

Dear Annalisa,
Not me produced that plots, I think you or Lucilla made them?
I could try, I am not sure I can do it for today.
Evgeny


> Dear Eugeny,
> I have the same remark for the KY channel, as for the pi+ pi- p one.
>
> We are showing the azimuthal VS the polar angle particle acceptance for
> +/- 1500 A.
> Would it be possible for you to produce the same plots for +/- 3375 A to
> be inserted in the proposal, instead?
>
> The figures are:
>
> thetaphie_6_p1500.pdf thetaphik_6_p1500.pdf
>
> thetaphip_6_p1500.pdf
>
> thetaphipim_6_p1500.pdf
>
>
> thetaphie_6_m1500.pdf
> thetaphik_6_m1500.pdf
> thetaphip_6_m1500.pdf
>
> thetaphipim_6_m1500.pdf
>
>
> Thank you in advance
> Annalisa
> Il 19/04/16 21:10, golovach at jlab.org ha scritto:
>> Annalisa, I am sending you an update of the figures.
>> (I see, the text is beeing updated/modified, then could you, please,
>>   update the figures in the updatet text.)
>> My updates are basicaly figure updates.
>>
>> - The figures in the section ''run condition'' were re-plot
>>    with the torus currents +/-1500 and +/-3375
>> - The count rate was modified assuming 30 days of the beam time.
>> - The minimal A12, A32, S12 were re-evaluated if using the
>>    torus current -3375 and 30 days of the beam time
>>    the figures 34--37 were re-plot accordingly.
>> Annalisa, could you, please, look over the whole text to check
>>    that the torus currents 2295 or 3700 do not appear anywhere.
>>    We used the torus currents +/-1500 and +/-3375 to study the run
>> conditions
>>    and we used the torus current -3375 in all other studies.
>>    Thank you.
>>
>>
>> My few comments:
>>
>>
>> 1)
>> Ralf's comment: Affiliation typo:
>> ``Scobeltsyn Institute of Physics, Moscow ...''
>> The correct name is
>> ``Skobeltsyn Institute of Nuclear Physics,
>>    Lomonosov Moscow State University''
>>
>>
>> 2)
>> Could we modify the figure presentation for the figures
>> ``Comparison of the model cross section $d\sigma/d\cos(\theta_K)$...''
>> and
>> ``Comparison of the model cross section
>> $d\sigma/d\Omega(\theta_K)$...'',
>> so as the two figures stay on the same page and occupy the whole page.
>> It would look nicer. The same applies to the following two figures.
>>
>>
>> 3)
>> Could we change the titles of the sections in the chapters 5 and 6
>> to make them looking in the one-type style?
>> I think, it would look nicer.
>>
>> 5.1
>> Event generator for $ep \rightarrow ep \pi^+ \pi^-$
>> 6.1
>> Event generator for $ep \rightarrow e K\Lambda$ and $ep \rightarrow e
>> K\Sigma^0$
>>
>> 5.2
>> Acceptance for $ep \rightarrow ep \pi^+ \pi^-$
>> 5.3
>> Acceptance for $ep \rightarrow e K\Lambda$
>>
>> Could we combine sections 5.3 and 5.4 into the one section and call it
>> 5.3
>> Run conditions
>> 6.3
>> Run conditions
>>
>>
>>
>> Annalisa,
>> I'm still working on the new figure 39, following Volker's suggestion.
>> I'll send you an update ASAP.
>>
>>
>> Best Regards,
>>     Evgeny
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Hybrid_baryons mailing list
>> Hybrid_baryons at jlab.org
>> https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/hybrid_baryons
>
> --
> ================================================
> Prof. Annalisa D'Angelo
> Dip. Fisica, Universita' di Roma "Tor Vergata"
> INFN Sezione di Roma Tor Vergata, Rome Italy
> email:annalisa.dangelo at roma2.infn.it
> Jefferson Laboratory, Newport News, VA USA
> Email: annalisa at jlab.org
> Tel: + 39 06 72594562
> Fax: + 39 06 2040309
>
> _______________________________________________
> Hybrid_baryons mailing list
> Hybrid_baryons at jlab.org
> https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/hybrid_baryons
>