[esa-t474] 1st DRAFT paper energy resolution

[Matthew Wing]

Dear Michele,

The results look promising.  I have a few semi-detailed comments on a 
quick read of the paper but state them now as they may require some 
changes.

Cheers,
Matthew.

o Figure 6.  You say that "Not all possible combinations are shown."  I
   wonder why as you show four combinations and there are anyway only six,
   aren't there ?  In this case, I would then show all.

o Figure 6, top right.  This graph has a particularly strange structure,
   with a double peak.  Do you have any comment ?

o Solving Eq.4, I do not get Eq.5.  Maybe I have made a mistake, but could
   you check.  E.g. if I take line 1 in Eq.4 and use the values in Eq.5
   0.187^2 + 0.018^2, then I definitely won't get 0.1865^2 as in Eq.4.

o Fig.9.  The dashed line is not y=x, but is offset.  Was this just to
   "best fit" the data, or is there some other reason ?

o Fig.11 and its interpretation.  Shouldn't the text say, "... vary from a
   few tenths of mT (for magnet 3B4) up to about 3 mT (for magnets 3B1, 3B2
   and 3B3)" ?

o Section 6.5.  ArcTan(-0.4374) is not 23.49 deg.

Looking forward to the next version.

On Wed, 10 Mar 2010, Michele Viti wrote:

> Hello everybody,
> in attachment the first draft of paper on the energy resolution. As anyone 
> can see, in the first page we wrote a list of possible authors:
>
> Who is interested please reply with comments on the draft.
>
> Who does not want his/her name in the author list, please write us as soon as 
> possible.
>
> Who does not reply will be deleted from the list and his name (or the 
> institution) put in the acknowledgment.
>
> The philosophy is to have as authors only people direct involved in the 
> analysis (which was actually also the philosophy of the BPM paper).
>
> cheers
>
> Michele

-----------------------------------
Matthew Wing
Department of Physics and Astronomy
University College London
Gower Street
London WC1E 6BT
Tel: +44 20 7679 7650
Fax: +44 20 7679 7145