Simultaneous measurement of the spin parameters<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mi>P</mml:mi></mml:math>and<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mrow><mml:mi>C</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi>NN</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math>in<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mi>pp</mml:mi></mml:math>elastic scattering at 2, 3, 4, and 6 Gev/<i>c<

Miller, Donald H.; Wilson, Charles L.; Giese, R.; Hill, D.; Nield, K.; Rynes, P.; Sandler, B.; Yokosawa, A.

doi:10.1103/physrevd.16.2016

Cited by 41 publications
(15 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This in- consistency of the data of [6] was already mentioned in [12]. At 2.20 GeV our data are compared with the A oono = A ooon data measured with ANL-ZGS polarized beam and with the PPT [7]. The quasi-elastic data from [9,10], measured with the same polarized proton beam and a liquid deuterium target, are also plotted.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 78%

“…All these data were measured with the proton beam energy having a relatively small uncertainty. This was not the case for the ANL-ZGS data, used at 1.732, 1.967, 2.138, and 2.444 GeV from [6], at 2.205 GeV from [7], at 2.301 GeV from [8], and quasielastic pp data measured with a deuterium target and a polarized proton beam at 2.205 GeV from [9,10]. It should be noted that the ANL-ZGS was a weak-focussing accelerator with a momentum * Deceased spread of ±3.5% (∆T kin ± 100MeV around 2.2 GeV), and that the kinetic energy at the target was determined by the currents of the beam line magnets.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 75%

“…The angular dependence is compared with the data from [2,6,7,9,10] and with predictions of a very recent phase shift analysis (PSA) [11]. In [12] it was observed that in the energy region under discussion the data measured before 1983 show a considerable difference in the absolute polarization values between different data sets.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 94%

See 2 more Smart Citations
Proton-proton elastic scattering analyzing power in the 2.16 to 2.28 GeV energy region
Arvieux
¹
,
Ball
²
,
Bystrický
³

et al. 1997
Zeitschrift f�r Physik C Particles and Fields
5
1
1
0
View full text Add to dashboard Cite
The angular dependence of the pp elastic scattering analyzing power was measured at SATURNE II with an unpolarized proton beam and the Saclay polarized proton target. The energy region in the vicinity of the accelerator depolarizing resonance Gγ = 6 at T kin = 2.202 GeV was studied. Measurements were carried out at seven energies between 2.16 and 2.28 GeV from 17 • to 55 • CM . No significant anomaly was observed in the angular and energy dependence of the results presented, whereas the existing data sets differ in this energy range.
show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 78%

Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 75%

See 1 more Smart Citation
Proton-proton elastic scattering analyzing power in the 2.16 to 2.28 GeV energy region
Arvieux
¹
,
Ball
²
,
Bystrický
³

et al. 1997
Zeitschrift f�r Physik C Particles and Fields
5
1
1
0
View full text Add to dashboard Cite
The angular dependence of the pp elastic scattering analyzing power was measured at SATURNE II with an unpolarized proton beam and the Saclay polarized proton target. The energy region in the vicinity of the accelerator depolarizing resonance Gγ = 6 at T kin = 2.202 GeV was studied. Measurements were carried out at seven energies between 2.16 and 2.28 GeV from 17 • to 55 • CM . No significant anomaly was observed in the angular and energy dependence of the results presented, whereas the existing data sets differ in this energy range.
show abstract

“…To extend the measurement to higher Q 2 , two changes were made from the first experiment. First, to increase the figure-of-merit (FOM) of the FPP, a CH 2 analyzer was used instead of graphite; hydrogen has much higher analyzing power [Spi83,Mil77] than carbon [Che95]. Second, the thickness of the analyzer was increased from 50 cm of graphite to 100 cm of CH 2 to increase the fraction of events with a second scattering in the analyzer.…”

Section: Proton Form Factor Measurements With Polarization Experimentsmentioning
confidence: 99%

Nucleon electromagnetic form factors
Perdrisat
¹
,
Punjabi
²
,
Vanderhaeghen
³

2007
Progress in Particle and Nuclear Physics
475
27
583
3
View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There has been much activity in the measurement of the elastic electromagnetic proton and neutron form factors in the last decade, and the quality of the data has been greatly improved by performing double polarization experiments, in comparison with previous unpolarized data. Here we review the experimental data base in view of the new results for the proton, and neutron, obtained at MIT-Bates, MAMI, and JLab. The rapid evolution of phenomenological models triggered by these high-precision experiments will be discussed, including the recent progress in the determination of the valence quark generalized parton distributions of the nucleon, as well as the steady rate of improvements made in the lattice QCD calculations.

show abstract

“…The choice reflects a compromise between choosing nuclei with high analyzing power and designing a polarimeter that can be built and operated safely and at a reasonable cost. While liquid hydrogen would represent the ideal in terms of analyzing power [119], the cost and non-trivial safety issues involved in installing and operating a large tank of LH 2 and the required cryogenic system in the HMS ruled out this option. A calibration measurement was carried out in 2005 at the Joint Institute for Nuclear Research (JINR) in Dubna, Russia to measure the analyzing power of the inclusive reaction p + CH 2 → one charged particle +X at proton momenta up to 5.3 GeV/c [120], demonstrating sufficient analyzing power to carry out experiment E04-108 in the amount of beam time approved.…”

Section: Ch 2 Analyzermentioning
confidence: 99%

Recoil Polarization Measurements of the Proton Electromagnetic Form Factor Ratio to High Momentum Transfer
Puckett
¹

2010
8
0
16
0
View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The electromagnetic form factors of the nucleon characterize the effect of its internal structure on its response to an electromagnetic probe as studied in elastic electronnucleon scattering. These form factors are functions of the squared four-momentum transfer Q 2 between the electron and the proton. The two main classes of observables of this reaction are the scattering cross section and polarization asymmetries, both of which are sensitive to the form factors in different ways. When considering large momentum transfers, double-polarization observables offer superior sensitivity to the electric form factor. This thesis reports the results of a new measurement of the ratio of the electric and magnetic form factors of the proton at high momentum transfer using the recoil polarization technique. A polarized electron beam was scattered from a liquid hydrogen target, transferring polarization to the recoiling protons. These protons were detected in a magnetic spectrometer which was used to reconstruct their kinematics, including their scattering angles and momenta, and the position of the interaction vertex. A proton polarimeter measured the polarization of the recoiling protons by measuring the azimuthal asymmetry in the angular distribution of protons scattered in CH 2 analyzers. The scattered electron was detected in a largeacceptance electromagnetic calorimeter in order to suppress inelastic backgrounds. The measured ratio of the transverse and longitudinal polarization components of the scattered proton is directly proportional to the ratio of form factors G AcknowledgmentsThis thesis would not have been possible without the support and efforts of many, many people. It would be impossible to give all due credit to all of the individual efforts that went into designing, planning, staging, and executing this experiment, and the subsequent analysis of the data. Therefore, any omissions from the following acknowledgments are in no way meant to diminish those contributions.I would like to thank the members of the GEp-III collaboration whose tireless efforts made experiments E04-108 and E04-019 a success. This includes the spokespeople; Ed Brash, Mark Jones, Charles Perdrisat and Vina Punjabi, and the other outstanding physicists involved in the core collaboration. I thank Frank Wesselmann for his successful leadership of the testing, installation, commissioning and operation of the Focal Plane Polarimeter, and his significant contribution to the data analysis in the form of the event decoding and tracking software for the FPP drift chambers. I thank Mark Jones for his encyclopedic knowledge of experimental Hall C and for his outsized contribution to making the various parts of the experiment work together as a whole, and for being called upon more often than not to troubleshoot problems with the experiment as they occurred. Mark's many important contributions to the data analysis included the optimization of the HMS reconstruction coefficients. Much of what I have learned about the actual hands-on require...

show abstract

Simultaneous measurement of the spin parametersPandCNNinppelastic scattering at 2, 3, 4, and 6 Gev/c<

Cited by 41 publications

References 32 publications

Proton-proton elastic scattering analyzing power in the 2.16 to 2.28 GeV energy region

Proton-proton elastic scattering analyzing power in the 2.16 to 2.28 GeV energy region

Nucleon electromagnetic form factors

Recoil Polarization Measurements of the Proton Electromagnetic Form Factor Ratio to High Momentum Transfer

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About