Difference between revisions of "April 25th, 2023"

From kl project
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 1: Line 1:
 
<b>Attended</b>: ''Moskov'', ''Mikhail'', ''Jim'', ''Sean'', ''Eugene'', ''Hovanes'', and ''Igor''. Yesterday evening, ''Justin'' broke his collarbone on a bike ride.
 
<b>Attended</b>: ''Moskov'', ''Mikhail'', ''Jim'', ''Sean'', ''Eugene'', ''Hovanes'', and ''Igor''. Yesterday evening, ''Justin'' broke his collarbone on a bike ride.
 +
 +
* ''Eugene'' said that ''Patricia'' is scheduled a ERR-I meeting on the first week of Aust, 2023.
 +
 +
* ''Moskov'' and ''Jim'' suggested for the next KLF Collaboration meeting as an International Conference for 3 days in September, 2023.
  
  

Revision as of 08:46, 25 April 2023

Attended: Moskov, Mikhail, Jim, Sean, Eugene, Hovanes, and Igor. Yesterday evening, Justin broke his collarbone on a bike ride.

  • Eugene said that Patricia is scheduled a ERR-I meeting on the first week of Aust, 2023.
  • Moskov and Jim suggested for the next KLF Collaboration meeting as an International Conference for 3 days in September, 2023.


  • On April 21th, Tanja Horn had a CPS meeting (main focus is CPS for Hall C) [1].

My concerns will be assuaged if a we had a radiation dose prediction of the target after a month of running with an electron beam of 90 na. No CPS and a pure electron beam.

I’d like to compare the case presented by Pavel today with one where the beam energy and target details are unchanged but instead of a photon beam on the target, the study would assume an electron beam of 90 na.

In other words, I’d like to compare what MIGHT be real-world conditions (with the CPS) with what would represent the conditions we have actually had in the past.

I might have asked for something that leaves us open to criticism that we are comparing apples to oranges.


  • On April 17th, we had a Hovanes CPS meeting discuss CPS design for Hall D and to prepare for ERR-I [2].