Hoi Lennaert,

Mick is zo vriendelijk zich te ontfermen overe deze zaak.... hij zal hetr mailen.
groeten,
- Marcel

On 2 March 2015 at 09:21, Lennaert Bel <lbel@nikhef.nl> wrote:
Hi all,

I know the deadline’s today. But right now I’m at home and there’s no trains to Amsterdam, and my own comments are on my desk… Hopefully I’ll manage to get to Nikhef this afternoon and quickly merge it, but there won’t be a lot of time left to circulate in the group. I hope that’s not a big problem.

Cheers,
Lennaert


> On 01 Mar 2015, at 21:55, Tjeerd Ketel <tjeerd@nikhef.nl> wrote:
>
> Dear Lennaert,
>
> Here are my comments:
>
> Line 101:
> Replace "Due to the small ... a few hundred MeV/c2" by
> "The small value of Delta M = M(Ds*-) - M(Ds-) = 140 MeV/c2 does not
> add very much to the average transverse momentum of the photons of a several
> hundreds of MeV/c2".
>
> Line 107:
> Add "and a pm 70 MeV/c2 window, respectively,"
> In line 130 the more realistic value of this 70 is given.
>
> Figure 2:
> Add "without background" after "signal".
> Probably "simulations" with "s" is better.
> Where is a description of these simulations?
> Without the correction in line 101, Delta M is not clearly defined.
>
> Figure 5:
> A rotated picture with horizontal bars is more suited and will show the
> difference between total and statistical uncertainty better for R*(LHCb).
> A table is of course the best way to represent a comparison of four
> numbers with uncertainties, unless we do not want to give the other
> three numbers.
> Add "experimental uncertainties for R(*)(LHCb) are shown by additional
> side bars".
>
> Line 218:
> R does not represent a decay mode.
> Replace "both R* ,vector, and R, scalar decays" by
> "both values of R and R*".
> We may add ", although the theoretical uncertainty of R* is relatively
> large".
> If you want to mention "scalar" and "vector" do it earlier
> in the paper.
>
> Line 222:
> Add "," after systematic.
> Add "uncertainties" after "B(...)".
>
> Best regards,
>   Tjeerd
>
> Citeren Tjeerd Ketel <tjeerd@nikhef.nl>:
>
>> Dear colleagues,
>>
>> We will collect comments by email on the two papers:
>>
>> PAPER-2015-010, Observation of the decay Bbar0s -> psi(2S) K+ pi-
>> Deadline        : 04-Mar-2015
>> Link            : https://cds.cern.ch/record/1992884
>>
>> and
>> PAPER-2015-008,
>> First observation and measurement of the branching fraction for the
>> decay B0s -> D*s-+ K+-$
>> Deadline        : 02-Mar-2015
>> Link            : https://cds.cern.ch/record/1992902
>>
>> I will collect the comments for the first paper latest on Sunday
>> and circulate them on Monday before updating and of the afternoon.
>>
>> Lennaert Bel will do the same for the second paper which has a later
>> dead line. So latest comments on Monday for this one.
>>
>> Please, send your comments by reply to bfys-physics.
>>
>> Best regards,
>>   Tjeerd
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bfys-physics mailing list
> Bfys-physics@nikhef.nl
> https://mailman.nikhef.nl/mailman/listinfo/bfys-physics

_______________________________________________
Bfys-physics mailing list
Bfys-physics@nikhef.nl
https://mailman.nikhef.nl/mailman/listinfo/bfys-physics