<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Testing theory&#8230;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.quantumdiaries.org/2012/08/26/testing-theory/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.quantumdiaries.org/2012/08/26/testing-theory/</link>
	<description>Thoughts on work and life from particle physicists from around the world.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 May 2013 15:29:27 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anna Phan</title>
		<link>http://www.quantumdiaries.org/2012/08/26/testing-theory/#comment-85024</link>
		<dc:creator>Anna Phan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Aug 2012 07:55:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.quantumdiaries.org/?p=24449#comment-85024</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Dear Alexey,

Yes and no, it&#039;s hard to tell from the plot, but if you look at Slide 23 of Phillip Urquijo&#039;s &lt;a href=&quot;https://indico.cern.ch/contributionDisplay.py?contribId=831&amp;confId=181298&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;presentation&lt;/a&gt; where I took the plot from, he points out that the error on the average inclusive and exclusive measurements are ~6% and ~10% respectively, and while the error on the leptonic measurement from Belle is ~14%, which is larger than both, the error on the average is ~10%...

Cheers,
Anna]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dear Alexey,</p>
<p>Yes and no, it&#8217;s hard to tell from the plot, but if you look at Slide 23 of Phillip Urquijo&#8217;s <a href="https://indico.cern.ch/contributionDisplay.py?contribId=831&amp;confId=181298" rel="nofollow">presentation</a> where I took the plot from, he points out that the error on the average inclusive and exclusive measurements are ~6% and ~10% respectively, and while the error on the leptonic measurement from Belle is ~14%, which is larger than both, the error on the average is ~10%&#8230;</p>
<p>Cheers,<br />
Anna</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alexey</title>
		<link>http://www.quantumdiaries.org/2012/08/26/testing-theory/#comment-84988</link>
		<dc:creator>Alexey</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Aug 2012 19:47:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.quantumdiaries.org/?p=24449#comment-84988</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&gt; And interestingly… the Vub measurement from B−→τ−ν⎯⎯τ is in agreement with both methods…

It&#039;s in agreement with both only because your uncertainties are large compared to either one, right?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&gt; And interestingly… the Vub measurement from B−→τ−ν⎯⎯τ is in agreement with both methods…</p>
<p>It&#8217;s in agreement with both only because your uncertainties are large compared to either one, right?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anna Phan</title>
		<link>http://www.quantumdiaries.org/2012/08/26/testing-theory/#comment-84898</link>
		<dc:creator>Anna Phan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 27 Aug 2012 07:26:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.quantumdiaries.org/?p=24449#comment-84898</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Dear Lamont,

Thanks for the question. The constraint really depends on the type of new physics model under scrutiny. An example can be found in the additional slides from Youngmin Yook&#039;s &lt;a href=&quot;http://belle.kek.jp/belle/talks/ICHEP12/yook.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;presentation&lt;/a&gt;, specifically on Slide 44 where there&#039;s an exclusion plot on the bottom right for the 2HDM (type II).

Cheers,
Anna]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dear Lamont,</p>
<p>Thanks for the question. The constraint really depends on the type of new physics model under scrutiny. An example can be found in the additional slides from Youngmin Yook&#8217;s <a href="http://belle.kek.jp/belle/talks/ICHEP12/yook.pdf" rel="nofollow">presentation</a>, specifically on Slide 44 where there&#8217;s an exclusion plot on the bottom right for the 2HDM (type II).</p>
<p>Cheers,<br />
Anna</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lamont Granquist</title>
		<link>http://www.quantumdiaries.org/2012/08/26/testing-theory/#comment-84871</link>
		<dc:creator>Lamont Granquist</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 26 Aug 2012 17:57:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.quantumdiaries.org/?p=24449#comment-84871</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;found in Ref. [17], we obtain fB &#124;Vub &#124; = [7.4 ± 0.8(stat) ±
0.5(syst)] × 10−4 GeV. Our result provides stringent
constraints on various models including charged Higgs
bosons.&quot;

any hint as to how stringent those constraints are?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;found in Ref. [17], we obtain fB |Vub | = [7.4 ± 0.8(stat) ±<br />
0.5(syst)] × 10−4 GeV. Our result provides stringent<br />
constraints on various models including charged Higgs<br />
bosons.&#8221;</p>
<p>any hint as to how stringent those constraints are?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
