I and my advisor (both theorists) used to have a nice collaboration with experimentalist A on paper X a few years ago. A and I were the co-first authors. A few months ago A came to us again on a follow-up experimental study, which will be paper Y to be submitted. A wanted to use our old theory from paper X to explain the new experiment in paper Y and asked our thoughts on this.
My advisor and I, after some discussion, found it somewhat interesting and did some calculation for a different new mechanism. I talked to A and sent my short calculation note and A also found this new mechanism a very interesting possibility and worth experimental investigation. However, eventually, we found that this new mechanism may not be all-compatible with this particular experiment, although it should appear better in some other cases and will be an important finding. Finally, we agreed to mainly rely on the old theory again in paper Y, and A probably will briefly mention this new possibility (not sure).
A wrote to my advisor and cc me asking to put our names in the acknowledgment and my advisor said OK (**). My advisor has so many papers and does not care (at least will not object in such an email reply). To be honest, I somewhat care, given the discussion and time involved (not sure if appropriate).
After a week, A wrote to me only again asking if some additional calculation or formula was possible for the explanation and comparison in this new paper Y. It is simple and I can do that. But I started to feel a bit disappointed to be still in the acknowledgment. Am I being too greedy and unethical? Or what should I do?
(If given coauthorship, certainly not co-first author, just some random position no one cares. A will be the only first author.)
(**) Actually, this was the only time my advisor replied to A's email. A was mainly communicating with me because my advisor acted not so responsively in replying to A's emails (ignored twice). But I'm pretty sure he was just too busy recently, otherwise we two didn't have to discuss the experiment and new mechanism at all when I mentioned to him A's early email.