Re: 217-265-9888 Tel conf Tuesday usual time

[Bernhard Lauss <lauss@berkeley.edu>]

Dear Peter,

just short comments

a) as Tom is off in Southern California for the weekend, he will
be back Tuesday morning, but won't be able to prepare anyhting
beyond he has already done, however, none of your special requests.

b) You are very welcome to send in a Panic abstract,
Deadline Aug.15.

c) I was actually already starting with including mup diffusion
in the Monte Carlo.
I think what we have to know for that is only a
mean velocity for our conditions.

But first I want to rerun without any diffusion
and considerable statistics, because one puzzle I
have is, that I see a nice impact dependence of the lifetime
with diffusion but I also see a similar, but much smaller dependende
with no diffusion at all, where the electron comes from
the  muon decay vertex , could be statistics could be something else,
I want to verify that before any diffusion business is believable.


		cheers

			Bernhard



*******************************************************************
Bernhard Lauss                 E-Mail: lauss@socrates.berkeley.edu
Physics Department
366 LeConte Hall
University of California @ Berkeley
Berkeley, CA 94720                             Tel: (510)-642 4057
United States                                  Fax: (510)-642 9811
*******************************************************************

On Fri, 5 Aug 2005, Peter Kammel wrote:

> Dear friends,
>
> I am announcing next weeks telconf already now, because
> I'm not here on Monday.
>
> I would like to walk you through my draft on electron deadtimes,
> which I promised at our UIUC analysis meeting. Having vnc
> working would be very helpful.
>
> The main agenda item should be a discussion of (a) the detector dependence
> of the lifetime as well as (b) the impact parameter cut sensitivity.
>
> For (a) we should assemble the information we already have and
> propose systematic further analysis steps.
> I suggest both Steve and Tom compile a table (and some
> illustrative plot) for the size of the observed differences
> as function of different parameters.
> Parameters include (not counting the obvious ones)
>      - single el vs all e requirement
>      - gondolas separated in inner outer detectors
>      - mSC only, that would be particularly helpful for mu+
>      - as function of impact parameter
>      - opposite gondola combinations for mu+
>      - different e signal definitions
>      - different TPC slices
> Probably it would be helpful to include the background variation
> in the table, so that it is obvious how the effect depends
> on the scale of the similarly behaved accidental variation.
>
> Conc (b) Steve and I had some ideas, Steve will comment more
> on this. It will result in the request to Bernhard to
> include mp diffusion in the MC. Again summaries on what
> the effect does or does not depend would be very helpful.
>
> On another issue. I would like to submit a MuCap abstract to
> Panic to present a talk there. If you agree, I'll do that
> next week.
>
> Have a nice weekend
>
> Peter
>