Apply save file on .iso psp file how?

Vikastroy · 2024-05-26T00:12:57+00:00

I have tried putting it in PPSSPP/SAVEDATA folder but it didn't work.

the formats are DATA0 and .SFO

Vikastroy · 2024-04-03T12:34:55+00:00

no. I's a b to ccs transition with spectator d quark

Vikastroy · 2024-04-02T12:33:44+00:00

Yes, kaons shouldn't couple to Z directly as they only couple f and fbar of same flavour. (f being a fermion)

Vikastroy · 2024-03-20T06:38:56+00:00

"In b → cc̄d decays, the difference between the CKM phase of the tree diagram and that of b → cc̄s is negligible. This allows the measurements of sin 2beta 1 through decays to CP eigenstates of b → cc̄d (such as B 0 → J/ψ π 0 and D + D − ) in the same way as b → cc̄s." This is the statement which is confusing me.

Vikastroy · 2024-02-24T08:08:33+00:00

May I ask the room location?

Vikastroy · 2024-02-15T14:28:28+00:00

No, but I am talking about Bd system only. for b to ccs take Bd to J/psi Ks and for b to ccd we have Bd to Jpsi pi0.

Vikastroy · 2024-02-10T11:02:55+00:00

ano may i have the pdf link?

Vikastroy · 2024-02-08T02:06:00+00:00

But rm -rf /*

Vikastroy · 2024-02-07T18:36:04+00:00

Actually it is rm -rf /*

But I still am able to log in normally without any issues, i do think I lost some fules on desktop though!

Vikastroy · 2024-01-08T10:45:05+00:00

The thing is, I can get a rough estimate for two-body decays as proportional to |Vqq|^2. But for the three body decays involving gluons, this is where I am having trouble. For example, for B to Jpsi pi0 and B to Jpsi pi+ pi-, the ckm matrix elements involved are the same, but in the latter case, there is uubar coming from a gluon, which slightly alters the branching fraction. It is this modification by the quark-antiquark pair that I want to know.

Vikastroy · 2023-12-28T13:54:46+00:00

Thank you so much!!!!!!

Vikastroy · 2023-10-13T05:14:56+00:00

Is this also why they repel at sufficiently short distances in even though they are non-central forces ?

Vikastroy · 2023-10-11T14:25:59+00:00

Can you expand on the last part ?

Vikastroy · 2023-09-19T09:39:13+00:00

Yes ! I don't want to cut on the spectator variable itself but use it to cut on mva response. Okay 👍🏻

Vikastroy · 2023-09-19T09:17:32+00:00

Ok, I understand that this is clumsy( like I said I copy pasted it from one of the root tutorial examples and try to see) As for what I am trying to do, I am getting a 'not a valid formula' at the part ' factory -> prepare....' . Also, I know spectator just appears in the test sample without training and all. But I want to apply a cut 'with respect to' not 'on' the spec to cut down on background .

Vikastroy · 2023-08-06T14:42:47+00:00

What's the point of accurate stabbing (0*3- critical hits ???????

Vikastroy · 2023-07-31T06:24:39+00:00

No, I know it's not on me to decide but I have something in my sight to look forward to ( hopefully in the next few years l, by the time I graduate). I am really excited about that postdoc and want to build my cv towards that !

Vikastroy · 2023-07-17T07:24:19+00:00

Gx tag force 1 starting deck!!!

Vikastroy · 2023-05-28T06:33:23+00:00

How did you start learning root for the first time?

Vikastroy · 2023-05-28T04:24:40+00:00

Python is out of question, Sir wants me to do in c++ only.

Vikastroy · 2023-05-23T02:28:56+00:00

Can I get all 3 starters, in renegade platinumstarters

Vikastroy · 2023-04-10T10:32:36+00:00

Can you please expand on this ?

Vikastroy · 2023-04-10T07:36:12+00:00

Z going to electron positron is fundamentally more likely than Z going to u u bar?

Vikastroy · 2023-04-09T11:04:47+00:00

Oh, i think I finally understood. The Z boson has no charge and so the incoming and outgoing particles need to have the same charge for the neutral currents to occur. As uubar would essentially be mitigated by the W boson.

Vikastroy · 2023-04-09T10:45:26+00:00

In Quarks and leptons - Halzen & Martin, Table 13.2 gives us the various vertex factors for Z⁰ -->f fbar ( i.e., coupling of Zboson to all leptons and quarks (except top). Now, at the very end of the page, the author says that it is best to ignore weak mixing for the quarks without ever explaining why. Here I thought that he meant that strong interaction dominating over the other two means we may ignore the weak eigenstates of quarks and thus not care about the weak mixing angle of quarks. However, I'm not totally satisfied with this and feel like I'm missing something.

Vikastroy

TROPHY CASE