Hoi Oliver,
> Another important issue Ed completely ignores , is the fact, that the OPE
> parameters Lambda and l1 have rather large uncertainties due to the
> unknown 1/mb3 corrections.
I am not sure about this point any more. As all this (SF relation
between b->sg and b->ulnu) is leading order in mB only, we explicitly
remove higher-order terms to be "as consistent as possible" (though we
are not really, we need the 1/m^2 terms, not only the 1/m terms, as
lone only comes in at 1/m^2). But this might imply that subleading
corrections could be expected to contribute and then we are back at
the higher corrections...
For all the rest we agree, I think. FWIW, I believe that the error
quoted by Ed is only the statistical, and does not include the
systematics (which are smaller for the measured <E_g>.
Cheers,
--U.
|