Proton-Proton Scattering at 25 Mev

Jeong, Tae-Hoon; Johnston, L. H.; Young, D. E.; Waddell, C.N.

doi:10.1103/physrev.118.1080

Cited by 36 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Some groups have an improbably low value of χ 2 (criterion 3) in fit2 or in the single group fit and are therefore rejected. These are 2 groups of polarizations [9,81] (in total 14 data) and 2 groups of differential cross sections [82,83] (in total 40 data). Except for the Erlangen79 polarizations at 6.141 MeV [9], the low χ 2 of these groups of data has been known already from earlier analyses.…”

Section: B the Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

Phase shift analysis of 0–30 MeV pp scattering data

et al. 1988

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A multi-energy phase shift analysis of all published proton-proton (pp) scattering data in the energy range T lab ≤ 30 MeV is presented. In the description of all partial waves the well-known long range interaction is included: the improved Coulomb, the vacuum polarization, and the one-pion-exchange potential. In the lower partial waves the energy-dependent analysis uses a P-matrix parametrization for the short range interaction. Special attention is paid to the electric interaction, the definition of the phase shifts and the selection of the data. The fit to the final data set comprising 360 scattering observables results in χ 2 /N df = 1.0, where N df is the number of degrees of freedom. The ppπ 0-coupling constant is determined to be g 2 ppπ 0 /4π = 14.5 ± 1.2, but there are several indications for a lower value. The optimum value for the P-matrix radius b ≈ 1.4 fm is satisfying. Single-energy phase shifts with second derivative matrices, and effective range parameters are given.

show abstract

Section: B the Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

Phase shift analysis of 0–30 MeV pp scattering data

et al. 1988

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Our numerical analysis was made using a mesh of size δ = fm 0.05 and under the assumption that the complicated electromagnetic interaction between incident particles and atoms can be accounted for only by the effective electrostatic potentials calculated in (13) and (15).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In this section we solve the radial Schrödinger equation for the finite electromagnetic potentials (13) and (15).…”

Section: The Schrödinger Equation With Finite Electromagnetic Potentialsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Recently results have been obtained at low energies for the reaction + p p [11][12][13][14][15], 3 He, 20 Ne, 40 Ar, 14 N [16], p+ 12 C [17,18], and for p+ 3 He [12,[18][19][20]. We compare ours results for the reaction − e + ( 3 He, 20 Ne, 40 Ar, 14 N ), n+ ( 12 C, 208 Pb), and p+ 12 C to show that these potentials obtained from extra-dimensions are compared with known experimental data and to set bound on the scale of the scenarios.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Elastic cross sections in an RSIIpscenario

Arceo¹,

Pedraza²,

González-Espinosa³

et al. 2014

J. Phys. G: Nucl. Part. Phys.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The elastic differential cross section is calculated at low energies (below 100 MeV) for the elements 3He, 20Ne, 40Ar, 14N, 12C, and for the 208Pb using a finite electromagnetic potential, which is obtained by considering a Randall–Sundrum II scenario modified by the inclusion of p compact extra-dimensions. The length scale is adjusted in the potential to compare with known experimental data and to set bounds for the parameter of the model. The effective four-dimensional (4D) electromagnetic potential is produced by a point charge, as seen from the three-brane that contains it, in uniform motion in an RSIIp scenario.

show abstract

“…Unfortunately, the data are not sufficiently precise in this region to give evidence for the very small phase shifts predicted by OPEC, so we cannot hope for much improvement in the analysis. We have checked this in detail using differential cross sections at 9.68, 15 18.2, 16 19.8, 17 and 25.63 18 Mev, and find that the solution regions already given by one of us (MHM) 19 are not significantly changed. At first sight, one might hope that at sufficiently low energy, the 3 P phases could be taken from OPEC, but model calculations show that the centrifugal shielding is insufficient to make this true even at 4 Mev.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Modified Analysis of Nucleon-Nucleon Scattering. IV.p−pScattering between 9.68 and 98 Mev

1961

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Proton-proton scattering experiments at 9. 68, 18.2, 19.8, 25.63, 39.4, 46, 66, 68.3, 95, and 98 Mev are analyzed under the assumption that the higher partial waves are correctly represented by the one-pion exchange contribution (OPEC). Although the data do not determine a unique phase shift set at any energy, the theoretically reasonable requirement that the l D 2 phase be positive and the 3 P 2 -^2 coupling parameter be negative at 68 and 98 Mev singles out the following solutions (nuclear-bar phase shifts in degrees):This solution type can be qualitatively followed to both lower and higher energies. Such an extension (a) has been shown by Riazuddin to be required by triplet nucleon-nucleon dispersion relations at 4 Mev, (b) is consistent with the best solutions at both 210 and 310 Mev, (c) is qualitatively similar to the requirements of the best phenomenological and semiphenomenological potential models, and (d) carries the signature of the P phases required for consistency with the final-state interaction in the photodisintegration of the deuteron. An attempt to tie solutions at 9.68, 25.63, and 39.4 Mev together using a three-parameter P-phase energy dependence derived by Fubini and Stanghellini, with two of the parameters determined by single pion exchange, was qualitatively consistent but quantitatively unsuccessful. Although on the above grounds, we believe that this is the physically correct solution type in this energy range, the reader is warned that the solution is experimentally not unique, and that the phase shifts can be varied by a few degrees in a correlated way without doing undue violence to the data. On both counts, it is highly desirable that the triple scattering experiments needed for refining these values be carried through. That only two such experiments at a single angle are needed has recently been shown by Iwadare.

show abstract

Proton-Proton Scattering at 25 Mev

Cited by 36 publications

References 3 publications

Phase shift analysis of 0–30 MeV pp scattering data

Phase shift analysis of 0–30 MeV pp scattering data

Elastic cross sections in an RSIIpscenario

Modified Analysis of Nucleon-Nucleon Scattering. IV.p−pScattering between 9.68 and 98 Mev

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About