Analyzing power of proton-nucleus elastic scattering between 80 and 180 MeV

Schwandt, P.; Meyer, H. O.; Jacobs, W. W.; Bacher, A.D.; Vigdor, S. E.; Kaitchuck, M. D.; Donoghue, T.R.

doi:10.1103/physrevc.26.55

Cited by 268 publications

(138 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

131

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The potential fitted by Schwandt et al [44] to cross section and analyzing power for proton elastic scattering for A ≥ 40 and 80 ≤ T p ≤ 180 MeV is commonly employed for knockout analyses. It may be used for either proton or neutron scattering since it contains a parametrization of the symmetry potential.…”

Section: Nonrelativistic Woods-saxon Potentialsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Nuclear transparency to intermediate-energy protons

Kelly

1996

Phys. Rev. C

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nuclear transparency in the (e, e ′ p) reaction for 135 ≤ T p ≤ 800 MeV is investigated using the distorted wave approximation. Calculations using densitydependent effective interactions, both empirical and theoretical, are compared with phenomenological optical potentials. We find that nuclear transparency is well correlated with proton absorption and neutron total cross sections and that calculations using density-dependent effective interactions provide the best agreement with data. Nuclear transparency calculations are compared with recent electron scattering data for Q 2 < 2 (GeV/c) 2 . For T p < ∼ 200 MeV we find that there is considerable sensitivity to the choice of optical model and that the empirical effective interaction provides the best agreement with the data, but remains 5-10% low. For T p > ∼ 300 MeV we find that there is much less difference between these models, but that the calculations significantly underpredict transparency data and that the discrepancy increases with A. The differences between Glauber and optical model calculations are related to their respective definitions of the semi-inclusive cross section. By using a more inclusive summation over final states the Glauber model emphasizes nucleonnucleon inelasticity, whereas with a more restrictive summation the optical model emphasizes nucleon-nucleus inelasticity; experimental definitions of the semi-inclusive cross section lie between these extremes.

show abstract

Section: Nonrelativistic Woods-saxon Potentialsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Nuclear transparency to intermediate-energy protons

Kelly

1996

Phys. Rev. C

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Our model was succesfully confronted with the available experimental data for polarization observables in [11,12]. In the present work we have applied our approach to proton knockout from the outer shell of 40 Ca for quasielastic kinematics and in-plane emission. We have focused on the dependence of the final-state interaction on the polarization angles.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The asymptotic nucleon state |p ′ s , with spin in the s direction, is computed in DWIA as a solution of the Schrödinger equation with an optical potential. In the particular case of the results for 40 Ca of the next section, we use the potential parameterization of Schwandt [40], the same considered in [25] since we want to compare with the results for polarized nuclei using the same interaction. The present model accounts for relativistic corrections that have proven to be successful in describing intermediate-energy inclusive and exclusive electron scattering observables in the region of the quasielastic peak [41,42,43,44,45].…”

Section: Formalism For (E E ′ P) Reactionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Both correspond to in-plane (φ = 0) knockout of a proton for quasielastic kinematics; that is, p ≃ q and p is almost perpendicular to q (quasiperpendicular kinematics). In both cases the proton is ejected from the d 3/2 shell of 40 Ca, and the corresponding orbit is represented by the shaded region as a planar projection. The only difference between the two cases is the direction of the initial spin.…”

Section: Cross Section and Semi-classical Picturementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The latter are relative to the path of the final proton, and hence they depend on the emission angles, while the former are fixed with respect to the initial state, and therefore do not depend on the emission angles. Accordingly the Lab The 40 Ca nucleus has been chosen in order to make direct comparisons with the 39 K polarized target considered in [25], where the initial state was described as a hole in the d 3/2 shell of the 40 Ca core. The kinematics q = 500 MeV/c, ω=133.5 MeV, corresponding to the quasielastic peak, and θ e = 30 o , have also been chosen as in [25], where an expanded plot similar to Figs.…”

Section: Cross Section and Semi-classical Picturementioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Final-state interaction and recoil polarization in reactions: comparison with the polarized target case

et al. 2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A study of the total cross section for polarized proton knockout in (e, e ′ p) reactions is carried out for the closed-shell nucleus 40 Ca. The dependence of FSI effects on polarization observables viewed as functions of the nucleon polarization angles is analyzed and interpreted within the basis of a semi-classical model for the orbit of the struck nucleon and trajectory of the ejected nucleon. A comparison with the case of a 39 K polarized target and unpolarized protons is performed.

show abstract

Bibliography

1998

Introductory Nuclear Physics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Analyzing power of proton-nucleus elastic scattering between 80 and 180 MeV

Cited by 268 publications

References 25 publications

Nuclear transparency to intermediate-energy protons

Nuclear transparency to intermediate-energy protons

Final-state interaction and recoil polarization in reactions: comparison with the polarized target case

Bibliography

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About