[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: analysis mu-decay
Dear Jules,
it's great to hear from you! It's just the time, when we can claim to
have fulfilled the main
proposal goal, i.e. to collect 10^10 good mu-p lifetime events (2*10^9
in December and
8*10^9 during the last 5 weeks). We still are up to do several
systematic studies and
will also to collect a bunch of mu+ lifetime events.
Conc. your question about impurities and muon diffusion, we are aware of
course that
these effects will make our time slope somewhat steeper and need to be
corrected.
Typical corrections are of the same order as the statistical error.
To your last question: we do practically not see the electron in the
tpc. Therefore,
we have just the "impact parameter" (distance between muon stop position and
nearest point of the reconstructed electron track, which tells us something
about diffusion..
If you want to learn about our first result of g_P you have to come to
Urbana next
September, where we will "unblind" the oscillator frequency used in the
run. (At
present nobody knows the exact value of our slope, in order to be
unbiased in
the analysis and systematics evaluation.)
I hope you are doing well!
With best regards
Claude
Jules DEUTSCH wrote:
> Dear Peter and Claude,
> We had a discussion with René concerning the analysis and we would
> appreciate your feelings.
> René reminded me of the inpurities which made difficult to adjust a
> pure exponential to the results. It seemed to me that these impurities
> have necessarily a shorter life-time then the main signal and so
> starting the fit at some later time may allow (with loss of
> statistics) to purify the result.
> Of-course a second factor may influence this method. Because of the
> migration of the neutral muon-proton system the decay takes place at a
> different place then the muon-stop. So (depending on the fiducial
> volume) you loose late signals. This pitfall pushes the result into
> the same direction as the impurities, so it seems to me. There is
> however a second factor to your disposal for this effect: the radius
> of the "fiducial" volume "muon-stop/decay".
> Am I wrong,?
> Looking forward to your response and good luck,
>
> Jules
>