1997
DOI: 10.1103/physrevc.56.3152
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Quasielastic electron scattering from40Ca

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

8
111
1

Year Published

2001
2001
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 85 publications
(120 citation statements)
references
References 70 publications
8
111
1
Order By: Relevance
“…6 the cross sections obtained using the FG model (p F = 249 MeV, ǫ B = 33 MeV [20]; represented by the dotted line), the GSF (solid line), and the calculations of Butkevich and Mikheyev [6] (dashed line) to the sample of electron scattering data collected at scattering angle 45.5 • and various 40 18 Ar beam energies [23]. Only our model includes FSI effects.…”
Section: Calciummentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…6 the cross sections obtained using the FG model (p F = 249 MeV, ǫ B = 33 MeV [20]; represented by the dotted line), the GSF (solid line), and the calculations of Butkevich and Mikheyev [6] (dashed line) to the sample of electron scattering data collected at scattering angle 45.5 • and various 40 18 Ar beam energies [23]. Only our model includes FSI effects.…”
Section: Calciummentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[23], containing data at the lowest scattering angle, namely 45.5 • , in conjunction with the highest values of beam energy-up to 841 MeV. We have checked that all the measurements at 45.5 • correspond to our region of interest in the (ω, |q|) plane.…”
Section: Points Inmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…(6,7,8) we can now evaluate the particle-hole matrix elements. Carrying out explicitly the sums over the spin, s k , and isospin, t k , variables and after some laborious, but straightforward, algebra we finally get…”
Section: Particle-hole Matrix Elementsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Even though the total cross section is well reproduced by a Fermi gas, this simple model overestimate data in the longitudinal channel, while it does the opposite in the transverse one. More recently Williamson et al [3] have presented new measurements with an increase (decrease) of the longitudinal (transverse) nuclear response. Still, the discrepancy remains.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%