RE: regular telconf 217-265-9888

["David W Hertzog" <hertzog@uiuc.edu>]

Peter,
	I've gone through your rather expertly prepared talk.  Nice.  It
strikes me that it is too long because many of the slides invite a
rather lengthy story.  Some have up to three yellow panels that each
have their own story.  These slide are great though.  They have lots of
details on them that the reader might want to view "at home" but they
are probably often too dense to deliver orally.  The usual modern
dilemma it seems.  

	So, what to emphasize?  You have a lot on theory at the
beginning and I like that for this audience.  The experiment seems
almost limited to the essentials, but there are some little chapters
(perhaps on impurities) that will sideline you if you are not careful.
I know it was a major issue, but it could be that a simple slide that
says the d concentration and the impurity concentration (then a
reference to "an appendix slide" to be viewed offline...i.e., in the
extra slides) could be a solution.  From a participant observer point of
view, the isotopic and impurity discussion is one of the hardest to get
a hold of anyway.  It assume in the first case a knowledge of the
following sequence:
	1) mu grabs a d
	2) mu can now move out of TPC unnoticed due to min in xsection
vs energy
	3) mu can possible hit a construction material
	4) mu lifetime will be reduced there due to higher caption by
Z^4
	5) net effective measured tau will be lower
Next
	1) direct mu capture on an impurity at the sub ppm level
multiplied by rate give effect in 4) above.  Then see 5)
To keep within systematic error budget, need
	a) d < xx ppm  (and measured for simple zero extrapolation
correction)
	b) Z < yy ppm  (measured by gas chromotograph and by direct
capture events)

Not sure if that is useful, but some argument there to keep all details
out but instead simply state the logical "proof" in a series of steps.

	In your error budget table you need UNITs (Hz)

I'll have to look again to make more suggestions.  I was struck that you
don't want to get hung up (i.e. lose a lot of time) on the detailed
theory slide 3 (and, for that matter those that follow).  You should
keep those but practice a very limited number of things to say about
them.  

	But, probably most important is to avoid using any of your time
(or very limited at most) to talk about mu-d (future) expt.  This is a
chance to show off your result and (how many minutes to you get?) you
should probably devote them to the MuCap slides.

	See you soon,
	D

-----Original Message-----
From: Peter Kammel [mailto:kammel@npl.uiuc.edu] 
Sent: Monday, October 23, 2006 11:54 PM
To: analysis -- Tom Banks; Steve Clayton; Tim Gorringe; Fred Gray; David
Hertzog; Malte Hildebrandt; Brendan Kiburg; Sara Knaack; Berhard Lauss;
Marat Vznuzdaev; Levchenko Mikhail; Francoise Mulhauser; Claude
Petitjean; R. Prieels; Vladimir Tishchenko; Peter Winter; Penny Sigler
Subject: regular telconf 217-265-9888 

Dear colleagues,

During tomorrow's telconf we should walk through the draft of my APS
talk. It is posted on

http://www.npl.uiuc.edu/exp/mucapture/coll/unblind/unblind.html
right after my unblinding summary.

Please read it in advance.

Tim, could you join to critically discuss my g_P update?
Claude, Steve and Tom, please also check.
My root script to update g_P etc is
http://www.npl.uiuc.edu/exp/mucapture/coll/unblind/dnp2006.cpp

Other reports include Brendan, Tom and Steve's work and studies.

Best regards

Peter 




> Peter,
> I have made a teleconference reservation starting on Tuesday,
September
> 12 and every Tuesday thereafter ending and including Tuesday, December
> 19 from 11:30am-1pm CST on:
>
> 217-265-9888


Peter Kammel  /  pkammel@uiuc.edu
Department of Physics, Loomis Laboratory
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
1110 West Green Street, Urbana, IL 61801 
Tel (217) 333-5424 / Fax (217) 333-1215