fact the distribution in the opening angle between $e^+$ and $e^-$ turns out to be practically flat. This distinction clearly does not work very well when the produced sparticles are heavy.

= 9.0 cm=8.0cm =9.0 cm=8.0cm

A more elegant way of distinguishing these signals from those other forms of new physics is to compare the cross-sections arising from [*both*]{} the processes $e^+ e^- \to \gamma G_n$ and $e^+ e^- \to e^+ e^- G_n$, both of which are determined by the two parameters $d$ and $M_S$, and hence, will have some correlation. In Figure 5, we have plotted the cross-sections $\sigma(\gamma G_n)$ versus $\sigma( e^+ e^- G_n)$ for different values of $d$. In view of the discussion in the previous section, we would like to note that here the rates for $e^+ e^- \to \gamma G_n$ have been computed with the same normalization of the string scale as that used for the Bhabha scattering process. Each curve corresponds to variation of $M_S$ over the range allowed by current experimental constraints. Once experimental data are available from a high energy $e^+ e^-$ machine, we should be able to pinpoint a small region (ideally a point) on the graph(s) in Figure 5. The 