|Message: Re: exrdm example (radioactive decay)||Not Logged In (login)|
Click on the Forum title, e.g. on the "Forums by Category" page, to read a sequence of postings to the Forum and its threads all in one page. If you are only interested in one thread or the thread following a specific posting, click the thread or the posting, which takes you to a smaller page, which contains only the part you are interested in and may be easier to navigate.
Messages are "chained" if there are only replies at the first level, i.e. 1/1.html, 1/1/1.html etc. In case of "chained" messages the message number is replaced by the icon and there is no indentation.
Inline: Display the subject line only or also the text of the posting(s); for the choice "All" the "Outline" choices are switched off.
|1||0||1||no text / full text of posting|
|2||1||All||text for level 1 only / text for All postings|
Outline: Choose the depth of the posting thread, successive toggle controls provide increasing detail.
|1||2||1||2 levels / 1 level (original posting)|
|2||3||2||3 levels / 2 levels|
|3||3||All||3 levels / all levels (all postings)|
Not all examples have their reference-outputs (if there's one available) updated at every relase, 'exrdm' is one of these, so it should be just taken as reference. As to the question of whether the example works with the latest release, please see the bug report and fix #846.
As to your second question: The beta spectrum can be aesily reconstructed by selecting the electrons only from the ntuple and you last statement is not correct. In any case exrdm is an "example" to show how to use the G4RadioactiveDecay process, and it is not intended as a general tool to meet all the requirements of simulations radioactive decays.
To your third question: the /gps/pos/centre command assumes a default units of "cm", if the fourth argument is omitted. This is what happend during the excution, but this is not what the code intended as it should have the units specified as "mm". (see line 197 of exrdmDetectorConstruction.cc). The cause of this problem is in line 195 where the carriage-return "\0" is no longer required. Thanks for uncovering this mistake!
|Inline Depth:||Outline Depth:||Add message:|