Ciao Alessio,
> > 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.,0.63,0.23};
> ErrB+={0.9,0.22,0.80,0.,0.10,0.08};
Br(B+->D1lnu)=0.56+/-0.16 is actually a measurement, so that I
would not use the isospin mediated result which is an hypothesis.
As far as the B+ -> D2lnu result is concerned, there is no measurement
AFAIK, so I would use the large error that we were using before (that I
guess we got from the upper limit in the paper)
So in summary,
I prefer the numbers of your previous posting, which are actualyl now in
the BAD and that I know daniele is already using
ciao
ric
>
> (seems that the quoted result on D_1 and D_2 is valid for both B0 and B+).
>
> Is that right for everybody?
> If so I'll commit and tag the changes.
> Alessio
>
