2000
DOI: 10.1134/1.1307989
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Experimental estimation of the possible subbarrier penetration of ultracold neutrons through vacuum-tight foils

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
9
0

Year Published

2006
2006
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
1
1

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 5 publications
0
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Considering the previous constraint p < 7 × 10 −6 [17] (vertical blue solid line), we see that the expected event rate could be as high as 36 kHz, which is easily detectable even without shielding. Actually, we think we can reach an upper rate of about 10 mHz or even 1 mHz [30][31][32] with suitable shields and detector (horizontal red solid line). We can then expect to reach a new upper constraint for the swapping probability p of about 10 −9 .…”
Section: Proposal At the Ill Reactormentioning
confidence: 98%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Considering the previous constraint p < 7 × 10 −6 [17] (vertical blue solid line), we see that the expected event rate could be as high as 36 kHz, which is easily detectable even without shielding. Actually, we think we can reach an upper rate of about 10 mHz or even 1 mHz [30][31][32] with suitable shields and detector (horizontal red solid line). We can then expect to reach a new upper constraint for the swapping probability p of about 10 −9 .…”
Section: Proposal At the Ill Reactormentioning
confidence: 98%
“…A constraint can be suggested from previous experiments [30][31][32]. Indeed, in different contexts, these experiments required low-noise neutron detectors to detect ultracold neutrons generated by conventional sources.…”
Section: E a Constraint As A Proof Of Conceptmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, the large unexpected loss rate is observed at a loss level of about 10 −5 per reflection and temperature independent [14]. The loss mechanism is still unknown, but inelastic up-scattering or quasi-elastic heating, and other proposed mechanisms seem to be ruled out by both theoretical calculations and experimental measurements as these rates are several orders of magnitude lower than the anomalous yet persistent loss rate [15][16][17].…”
Section: B More Puzzles In Neutron Lifetime and Ckm Unitaritymentioning
confidence: 92%
“…where the Fermi constant G F = 1.1663788(6) × 10 −5 GeV −2 [10], m e = 0.51099895000 (15) MeV is the electron mass [10], the neutron-specific radiative correction δ R = 0.014902(2)…”
Section: E Neutron Lifetime and Ckm Unitaritymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…where the Fermi constant G F = 1.1663788(6) × 10 −5 GeV −2 [10], m e = 0.51099895000 (15) MeV is the electron mass [10], the neutron-specific radiative correction δ ′ R = 0.014902(2) [82], the phase space factor f n is 1.6887(1) [82,83], and natural units (ℏ = c = 1) are used for simplicity. The 1% difference in neutron β-decay lifetime τ n between measurements from "beam" and "bottle" experiments leads to the discrepant V ud values according to Eq.…”
Section: E Neutron Lifetime and Ckm Unitaritymentioning
confidence: 99%