Choose timezone
Your profile timezone:
Powered by Indico
v3.3.5
Intro:
- move to Thursdays until the end of Oct.
Tony:
- we can understand only a factor of ~10 but not ~20?
- 10^5 macro-particles taking long - still checking
- compare also the JETI40 case with the CDR if possible
Sasha:
- comparing the Bremss spectra ratios between the LOI and now for Sasha and Tony
- could think about increasing the thickness of the target?
- can we start producing the e+laser while debugging the photon+laser?
- can pass the photon+laser *signal*?
- need to save only the truth tracks which end up in non-sensitive volumes
- Kapton stability in the IP and in the downstream target is questionable —> need action!!!
- production:
- move on as soon as possible with the e+laser starting from Tony’s files (and later with just the beam, i.e. no laser)
- postpone g+laser for now until we understand the problem since if it is on the photon-beam side we can have possibly different background situation.
Maryna:
- fit of the measured spectrum works well for the edges reconstruction (focus on the first edge)
- will do the simulation with the pipe in parallel using a branch of Sasha's full G4 setup but with the beampipe.
Kyle:
- LANEX quantum efficiency is another confirmation of its inapplicability as a profiler.
- need very good knowledge of the magnetic field map as well as the alignment of the magnet wrt the spectrometer.
- Sasha: 3-4 m of air will change the divergence and take it away from the photon divergence. This might be checked with testbeam data (Sasha and Marius have more info)