I don't want to sound bitter, but it is obvious that people that
are working on codes should meet periodically and discuss the issues
of the day. This regularly does not happen.
That was the point of analysis meetings. There is where you can ask
these questions and where such coordination can easily occur. E-mail
communication is of course fine, but there is no point in complaining
about things that could have been easily found out by discussing in
person. Unless we pretend to have telepathic abilities and are able
to guess what each other is doing.
-- ________________________________________________________________________________ Tancredi Botto, phone: +1-617-253-9204 mobile: +1-978-490-4124 research scientist MIT/Bates, 21 Manning Av Middleton MA, 01949 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^On Fri, 27 Jun 2003, Aaron Joseph Maschinot wrote:
> > if unit conventions exist for the v3 reconstruction, what exactly are > they? i don't want to work on the reconstruction using different units. > for that matter, they should be publicly known (e.g. by this e-mail) > > is the convention below correct? > > distances = [cm] > times = [ns] > TDC values = [respective TDC units] > angles = [deg] > magnetic field = [kG] > energies = [GeV] > > are these correct? any i left out? > > just to note it, the Monte Carlo (ALL of the Monte Carlo) uses the > following unit conventions: > > distances = [cm] > times = [s] > TDC values = [respective TDC units] > angles = [deg] > magnetic field = [kG] > energies = [GeV] > > aaron >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Mon Feb 24 2014 - 14:07:29 EST