2006
DOI: 10.1088/0953-4075/39/5/008
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Post–prior discrepancies in CDW–EIS calculations for ion impact ionization fully differential cross sections

Abstract: Abstract.In this work we present fully differential cross sections (FDCSs) calculations using post and prior version of CDW-EIS theory for helium single ionization by 100 MeV C 6+ amu −1 and 3.6 MeV amu −1 Au 24+ and Au 53+ ions. We performed our calculations for different momentum transfer and ejected electron energies. The influence of internuclear potential on the ejected electron spectra is taken into account in all cases. We compare our calculations with absolute experimental measurements. It is shown tha… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
41
0

Year Published

2006
2006
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

3
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 40 publications
(42 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
0
41
0
Order By: Relevance
“…As shown by Belkić et al [46], in the case of simultaneous transfer and ionizaton, due to the potential V corr in the corresponding perturbation, the post form is more adequate than its prior counterpart. However, the calculations of Ciappina et al [47,48] within continuumdistorted-wave-eikonal-initial-state (CDW-EIS) model for ion impact ionization of helium have shown that the prior version gives better agreement with experimental data than the post version calculations.…”
Section: The Results Of Numerical Computationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As shown by Belkić et al [46], in the case of simultaneous transfer and ionizaton, due to the potential V corr in the corresponding perturbation, the post form is more adequate than its prior counterpart. However, the calculations of Ciappina et al [47,48] within continuumdistorted-wave-eikonal-initial-state (CDW-EIS) model for ion impact ionization of helium have shown that the prior version gives better agreement with experimental data than the post version calculations.…”
Section: The Results Of Numerical Computationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This finding was particularly surprising given the fact that the measurements were carried out under kinematical conditions which are believed to be perfectly suitable for applicability of perturbative approaches: (i) |Z p |/v p = 0.1 a.u., where Z p and v p are the projectile charge and velocity, respectively, and (ii) small energy-and momentum-transfer values. Further discussions involved various attempts to explain the source of the discrepancies in the nodal structure, ranging from higher-order [4][5][6][7][8] and non-perturbative mechanisms [7,[9][10][11][12]] to experimental uncertainties [8,13] and so-called projectile coherence effects [14]. Though the explanation due to experimental uncertainties alone was refuted in [15], the very recent 1-MeV p+He experiment at momentum transfer of 0.75 a.u.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A lesser number of papers [14,18,20,23,24,28,29,31,33,[35][36][37][38][39][40][41] have been devoted to the more extreme system Au 53+ + He where the projectile interaction with the He target is very much stronger. Bridging the strength gap, there has also been work on single ionization of He by Au 24+ [23,28,31,39,41].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A lesser number of papers [14,18,20,23,24,28,29,31,33,[35][36][37][38][39][40][41] have been devoted to the more extreme system Au 53+ + He where the projectile interaction with the He target is very much stronger. Bridging the strength gap, there has also been work on single ionization of He by Au 24+ [23,28,31,39,41]. The experimental studies have ranged from single differential cross sections to double differential cross sections, but only in recent years have fully differential measurements become available [19][20][21][22][23][24][26][27][28]39].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%