Hi all,
seems that we were using still the 2000 values instead
of the 2002 ones. Thanks to Urs for opinting that out.
I've taken a look trough PDG 2002 and here's the result:
Old 2000::
B0={10.2,2.10,4.68,0.,0.63,0.23};
ErrB0={0.4,0.19,0.22,0.,0.10,0.08};
New proposal 2002::
B0={10.5,2.11,4.60,0.,0.63,0.23};
ErrB0={0.8,0.17,0.21,0.,0.10,0.08};
Old 2000 ::
B+={10.2,2.15,5.30,0.,0.56,0.29};
ErrB+={0.4,0.22,0.80,0.,0.16,0.33};
New proposal 2002::
B+={10.2,2.15,5.30,0.,0.56,0.29};
ErrB+={0.9,0.22,0.80,0.,0.16,0.33};
The D_1 and D_2 modes have not (as far as I can tell)
been updated.
Here's the referenced paper:
http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~asarti/recoil/semilep.ps.gz
Let me know if there's any need to further investigate the D_1 and D_2
modes,
otherwise I'll go on and commit the changes to recoilDSys.cc.
Cheers,
Alessio
______________________________________________________
Alessio Sarti Universita' & I.N.F.N. Ferrara
tel +39-0532-974328 Ferrara
roma +39-06-49914338
SLAC +001-650-926-2972
"... e a un Dio 'fatti il culo' non credere mai..."
(F. De Andre')
"He was turning over in his mind an intresting new concept in
Thau-dimensional physics which unified time, space, magnetism, gravity
and, for some reason, broccoli". (T. Pratchett: "Pyramids")
On Thu, 13 Feb 2003, Urs Langenegger wrote:
>
> Hoi,
>
> I just had yet another look at the HEAD of recoilDSys.cc. Could
> someone please explain all the numbers for data? Comparing to PDG,
> neither the central values nor the errors seem to be what they should
> be.
>
> Cheers,
> --U.
>
