Proton root-mean-square radii and electron scattering

Sick, I.; Trautmann, D.

doi:10.1103/physrevc.89.012201

Cited by 49 publications

(67 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Ref. [92] suggests that the range of Q 2 needed to determine the slope is in the range 0.01 to 0.06 GeV 2 . Considering this first over a somewhat narrower range, of the 1422 Mainz 2010 data points, about 200 are at Q 2 below 0.02 GeV 2 , and have small uncertainty.…”

Section: Electronic Scattering Measurementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The proton radius puzzle

Carlson

2015

Progress in Particle and Nuclear Physics

252

164

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The proton size, specifically its charge radius, was thought known to about 1% accuracy. Now a new method probing the proton with muons instead of electrons finds a radius about 4% smaller, and to boot gives an uncertainty limit of about 0.1%. We review the different measurements, some of the calculations that underlie them, some of the suggestions that have been made to resolve the conflict, and give a brief overview new related experimental initiatives. At present, however, the resolution to the problem remains unknown.

show abstract

Section: Electronic Scattering Measurementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The proton radius puzzle

Carlson

2015

Progress in Particle and Nuclear Physics

252

164

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The charge, magnetic, and quadrupole form factors are related to the invariant functions G i (Q)'s by 17) or directly to the matrix elements g λ 's by 20) and are normalized to…”

Section: Few-nucleon Form Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Electromagnetic structure of few-nucleon ground states

Marcucci

Gross

Peña

et al. 2016

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

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Experimental form factors of the hydrogen and helium isotopes, extracted from an up-to-date global analysis of cross sections and polarization observables measured in elastic electron scattering from these systems, are compared to predictions obtained in three different theoretical approaches: the first is based on realistic interactions and currents, including relativistic corrections (labeled as the conventional approach); the second relies on a chiral effective field theory description of the strong and electromagnetic interactions in nuclei (labeled χEFT); the third utilizes a fully relativistic treatment of nuclear dynamics as implemented in the covariant spectator theory (labeled CST). For momentum transfers below Q 5 fm −1 there is satisfactory agreement between experimental data and theoretical results in all three approaches. However, at Q 5 fm −1 , particularly in the case of the deuteron, a relativistic treatment of the dynamics, as is done in the CST, is necessary. The experimental data on the deuteron A structure function extend to Q ≃ 12 fm −1 , and the close agreement between these data and the CST results suggests that, even in this extreme kinematical regime, there is no evidence for new effects coming from quark and gluon degrees of freedom at short distances.

show abstract

“…For the determination of the rms-radius the knowledge on the large-r behavior of ρ(r) is important to bridge the gap between the region of 0.5 < q < 1.2f m −1 where the data are sensitive to the rms-radius to the q = 0 point where the rms-radius is obtained from the slope of G e (q) as function of q 2 [21]. Also for the Zemach moments the information on the large-r shape of ρ(r) removes the major source of model dependence inherent in the choice of the parameterization for ρ(r) or G e (q).…”

Section: Moments Formentioning

confidence: 99%