Quasifree Electron Scattering in Atomic Collisions: The Ramsauer–Townsend Effect Revisited

Abstract

The history of the Ramsauer–Townsend effect and its influence on electrons emitted during ion-atom collisions is reviewed. Experimental methods as well as theoretical approaches are presented. Particular emphasis is laid on similarities between the angular variation of the elastic electron scattering cross sections and that of the singly differential electron loss cross sections or, using inverse kinematics, that of the target ionization cross sections.

Elastic resonant and nonresonant differential scattering of quasifree electrons fromB4+(1s)andBenis1, Zouros2, Gorczyca3 et al. 2004Phys. Rev. A3232011View full textAdd to dashboardCite

“…Quasifree electron-ion scattering investigations have been refined over the past decade [21,41,49,57,61,62], substantially reducing undesirable nucleus-ion contributions (e.g., e-n interactions) by choosing favorable collision conditions and low-Z targets [21,46]. Good agreement with more recent R-matrix calculations have caught the attention of the electron-ion scattering community [1,10] and include measurements of resonant and nonresonant elastic [49,58] and inelastic [42,57] electron scattering from H-like ions, as well as superelastic scattering from metastable He-like ions [59,60].…”

Advances in bremsstrahlung: a review

“…The reduction of the cross section becomes more prominent the higher the collision energy. Moreover, at energies well above 50 MeV, an extended charge density may lead to diffraction structures in the cross section [54], in a similar way as for elastic electron scattering [77].…”

Indirect-collective referencing (ICR) in the elite journal literature of physics. I. A literature science study on the journal level

“…It was decided to include (or more precisely, not to exclude), in addition to the 2,652 such scientific communications of the 44 selected nonreview source journals to be processed, the only ten “review” articles published in the processed issues of seven source journals. These are: the “critical review” of Maboudian & Howe (1997), the “topical review” of Biermann (1997), the “brief review” of Chubykalo & Smirnov‐Rueda (1997), and the “review” articles of Anisimov, Aryasetiawan, & Lichtenstein (1997), Jenks, Sadeghi, & Wikswo (1997), Levi & Kotrla (1997), Lucas et al (1997), Oshima & Nagashima (1997), White & Turner (1997), and Wilding (1997). An analysis examining the impact of this decision showed that while the inclusion of these ten review articles in the research material raised the numerical value of the total average of the p:C index‐number by 0.1, and that of the r:C index‐number by 0.3, it was later found that contrary to expectation it did not reduce the average rate of communications containing ICR act(s).…”