Difference between revisions of "HYP Pb-exp 20231115"

From Tritium Experiments Group
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 
Line 9: Line 9:
 
<font size="4">[[Media:JLab meeting gogami 20231115.pdf|JLab_meeting_gogami_20231115.pdf]]</font>
 
<font size="4">[[Media:JLab meeting gogami 20231115.pdf|JLab_meeting_gogami_20231115.pdf]]</font>
 
* The errors on s<sub>&Lambda;</sub> are similar for 10-20&mu;A and 20-40 days.
 
* The errors on s<sub>&Lambda;</sub> are similar for 10-20&mu;A and 20-40 days.
* Toshi's S/N is worse than that of Guido. <br> &rarr; will be checked.
+
* S/N assumed in the Toshi's simulation is worse than that of Guido. <br> &rarr; This could be because of &pi;<sup>+</sup> and proton contamination <br> (Guido did not take into account &pi;<sup>+</sup> and proton contamination in the simulation)
 
* Let's quantitatively think about physics outcome from the excited states (p, d, f).  
 
* Let's quantitatively think about physics outcome from the excited states (p, d, f).  
  

Latest revision as of 11:26, 16 November 2023

Pb target experiment (E12-20-013)

Infomation

  • Time and date: 13:30-15:00 Nov 15, 2023 EST
  • Participants: Franco, Guido, Nue, Toshi, Teppei
  • Place: CC F324-325 (JLab)

Discussion

JLab_meeting_gogami_20231115.pdf

  • The errors on sΛ are similar for 10-20μA and 20-40 days.
  • S/N assumed in the Toshi's simulation is worse than that of Guido.
    → This could be because of π+ and proton contamination
    (Guido did not take into account π+ and proton contamination in the simulation)
  • Let's quantitatively think about physics outcome from the excited states (p, d, f).




Back to Home