Refine
Language
- English (5)
Has Fulltext
- yes (5)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (5)
Keywords
- Elastic scattering (1)
- Polarization (1)
We report a high precision measurement of the transverse single spin asymmetry AN at the center of mass energy √s=200 GeV in elastic proton–proton scattering by the STAR experiment at RHIC. The AN was measured in the four-momentum transfer squared t range 0.003⩽|t|⩽0.035 (GeV/c)2, the region of a significant interference between the electromagnetic and hadronic scattering amplitudes. The measured values of AN and its t-dependence are consistent with a vanishing hadronic spin-flip amplitude, thus providing strong constraints on the ratio of the single spin-flip to the non-flip amplitudes. Since the hadronic amplitude is dominated by the Pomeron amplitude at this √s, we conclude that this measurement addresses the question about the presence of a hadronic spin flip due to the Pomeron exchange in polarized proton–proton elastic scattering.
Elliptic flow from nuclear collisions is a hadronic observable sensitive to the early stages of system evolution. We report first results on elliptic flow of charged particles at midrapidity in Au+Au collisions at sqrt[sNN] = 130 GeV using the STAR Time Projection Chamber at the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider. The elliptic flow signal, v2, averaged over transverse momentum, reaches values of about 6% for relatively peripheral collisions and decreases for the more central collisions. This can be interpreted as the observation of a higher degree of thermalization than at lower collision energies. Pseudorapidity and transverse momentum dependence of elliptic flow are also presented.
Elliptic flow from nuclear collisions is a hadronic observable sensitive to the early stages of system evolution. We report first results on elliptic flow of charged particles at midrapidity in Au+Au collisions at sqrt(s_NN)=130 GeV using the STAR TPC at RHIC. The elliptic flow signal, v_2, averaged over transverse momentum, reaches values of about 6% for relatively peripheral collisions and decreases for the more central collisions. This can be interpreted as the observation of a higher degree of thermalization than at lower collision energies. Pseudorapidity and transverse momentum dependence of elliptic flow are also presented.
Comparing projections of future changes in runoff from hydrological and biome models in ISI-MIP
(2013)
Future changes in runoff can have important implications for water resources and flooding. In this study, runoff projections from ISI-MIP (Inter-sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project) simulations forced with HadGEM2-ES bias-corrected climate data under the Representative Concentration Pathway 8.5 have been analysed for differences between impact models. Projections of change from a baseline period (1981–2010) to the future (2070–2099) from 12 impacts models which contributed to the hydrological and biomes sectors of ISI-MIP were studied. The biome models differed from the hydrological models by the inclusion of CO2 impacts and most also included a dynamic vegetation distribution. The biome and hydrological models agreed on the sign of runoff change for most regions of the world. However, in West Africa, the hydrological models projected drying, and the biome models a moistening. The biome models tended to produce larger increases and smaller decreases in regionally averaged runoff than the hydrological models, although there is large inter-model spread. The timing of runoff change was similar, but there were differences in magnitude, particularly at peak runoff. The impact of vegetation distribution change was much smaller than the projected change over time, while elevated CO2 had an effect as large as the magnitude of change over time projected by some models in some regions. The effect of CO2 on runoff was not consistent across the models, with two models showing increases and two decreases. There was also more spread in projections from the runs with elevated CO2 than with constant CO2. The biome models which gave increased runoff from elevated CO2 were also those which differed most from the hydrological models. Spatially, regions with most difference between model types tended to be projected to have most effect from elevated CO2, and seasonal differences were also similar, so elevated CO2 can partly explain the differences between hydrological and biome model runoff change projections. Therefore, this shows that a range of impact models should be considered to give the full range of uncertainty in impacts studies.
Projections of future changes in runoff can have important implications for water resources and flooding. In this study, runoff projections from ISI-MIP (Inter-sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project) simulations forced with HadGEM2-ES bias-corrected climate data under the Representative Concentration Pathway 8.5 have been analysed. Projections of change from the baseline period (1981–2010) to the future (2070–2099) from a number of different ecosystems and hydrological models were studied. The differences between projections from the two types of model were looked at globally and regionally. Typically, across different regions the ecosystem models tended to project larger increases and smaller decreases in runoff than the hydrological models. However, the differences varied both regionally and seasonally. Sensitivity experiments were also used to investigate the contributions of varying CO2 and allowing vegetation distribution to evolve on projected changes in runoff. In two out of four models which had data available from CO2 sensitivity experiments, allowing CO2 to vary was found to increase runoff more than keeping CO2 constant, while in two models runoff decreased. This suggests more uncertainty in runoff responses to elevated CO2 than previously considered. As CO2 effects on evapotranspiration via stomatal conductance and leaf-area index are more commonly included in ecosystems models than in hydrological models, this may partially explain some of the difference between model types. Keeping the vegetation distribution static in JULES runs had much less effect on runoff projections than varying CO2, but this may be more pronounced if looked at over a longer timescale as vegetation changes may take longer to reach a new state.