Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Physical constants could be more precise #9

Open
joaoabcoelho opened this issue Nov 25, 2022 · 0 comments
Open

Physical constants could be more precise #9

joaoabcoelho opened this issue Nov 25, 2022 · 0 comments

Comments

@joaoabcoelho
Copy link

joaoabcoelho commented Nov 25, 2022

I see some differences between Prob3++ and OscProb due to mismatches in physical constants. It would be nice to collect the constants in a more central place for easy checking and also make them more precise with some references on where the values came from.

For example G_F differs from OscProb by 0.04%:

static const double tworttwoGf = 1.52588e-4;

1.5264932e-4 in OscProb

While the LoEfac differs by 0.005%:

const double LoEfac = 2.534;

2.533865379 in OscProb

While these are quite small differences, they can accumulate when L/E is large.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant