Theory of the <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" altimg="si142.gif" display="inline" overflow="scroll"><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:math> levels in muonic deuterium

Krauth, Julian J.; Diepold, Marc; Franke, B.; Antognini, Aldo; Kottmann, F.; Pohl, Randolf

doi:10.1016/j.aop.2015.12.006

Cited by 62 publications

(85 citation statements)

References 68 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…[18], are consistent within 0.6%. All theoretical calculations have been summarized by Krauth et al [19] which resulted in a recommended value of δ TPE =-1.7096(200) meV. This value was also used by Pohl et al [1] to extract r d using Eq.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The deuteron-radius puzzle is alive: A new analysis of nuclear structure uncertainties

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To shed light on the deuteron radius puzzle we analyze the theoretical uncertainties of the nuclear structure corrections to the Lamb shift in muonic deuterium. We find that the discrepancy between the calculated two-photon exchange correction and the corresponding experimentally inferred value by Pohl et al.[1] remain. The present result is consistent with our previous estimate, although the discrepancy is reduced from 2.6 σ to about 2 σ. The error analysis includes statistic as well as systematic uncertainties stemming from the use of nucleon-nucleon interactions derived from chiral effective field theory at various orders. We therefore conclude that nuclear theory uncertainty is more likely not the source of the discrepancy.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The deuteron-radius puzzle is alive: A new analysis of nuclear structure uncertainties

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…• [B] Second, the Lamb shift between the 2S and 2P levels for muonic hydrogen [5,6] and muonic deuterium [7,8] differ from the SM expected values by:…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Accommodating three low-scale anomalies (g − 2, Lamb shift, and Atomki) in the framed Standard Model

Bordes

Hong-Mo

Tsun

2019

Int. J. Mod. Phys. A

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The framed standard model (FSM) predicts a 0 + boson with mass around 20 MeV in the "hidden sector", which mixes at tree level with the standard Higgs h W and hence acquires small couplings to quarks and leptons which can be calculated in the FSM apart from the mixing parameter ρ U h . The exchange of this mixed state U will contribute to g − 2 and to the Lamb shift. By adjusting ρ U h alone, it is found that the FSM can satisfy all present experimental bounds on the g − 2 and Lamb shift anomalies for µ and e, and for the latter for both hydrogen and deuterium.The FSM predicts also a 1 − boson in the "hidden sector" with a mass of 17 MeV, that is, right on top of the Atomki anomaly X. This mixes with the photon at 1-loop level and couples thereby like a dark photon to quarks and leptons. It is however a compound state and is thought likely to possess additional compound couplings to hadrons. By adjusting the mixing parameter and the X's compound coupling to nucleons, the FSM can reproduce the 1 production rate of the X in beryllium decay as well as satisfy all the bounds on X listed so far in the literature.The above two results are consistent in that the U , being 0 + , does not contribute to the Atomki anomaly if parity and angular momentum are conserved, while X, though contributing to g − 2 and Lamb shift, has smaller couplings than U and can, at first instance, be neglected there.Thus, despite the tentative nature of the 3 anomalies in experiment on the one hand and of the FSM as theory on the other, the accommodation of the former in the latter has strengthened the credibility of both. Indeed, if this FSM interpretation were correct, it would change the whole aspect of the anomalies from just curiosities to windows into a vast hitherto hidden sector comprising at least in part the dark matter which makes up the bulk of our universe.The results [A] and [B] lack statistical significance while [C] needs to be independently confirmed. But if they are real, then the consequence is highly significant, being suggestive of new physics outside the standard model framework.It has been suggested that [A] and [B] are explainable by a new scalar boson (say U ) of low mass while [C] points to a new (perhaps spin 1) boson (say X) of mass around 17 MeV. The fact that the effects [A]-[C] are all small and no hints of U and X are seen anywhere else means that these new bosons must have rather unusual properties and small couplings to ordinary matter. The question is then raised as to the theoretical origin of these particles U and X which would lie outside the standard model framework. Are they just isolated phenomena or is there a whole new class of particles hitherto unknown to us which interact but little with the particles we know, and of which both U and X are but examples as tips of an iceberg?To address these questions in general terms, the framed standard model (FSM) seems rather well placed. It predicts, among other things, a cluster of boson states, some scalars H light and some vectors G light , all with masses ar...

show abstract

“…It is worth noticing that the uncertainties in δ TPE are slightly different than those shown in Table 1. This is due to the fact that the uncertainties in Table 1 are taken from the analysis performed by colleagues [4,5] and do not include only our calculations, but an average with results of other groups as well [14,15,16,17]. In particular, here we want to concentrate on the deuteron, for which we have so far performed the most thorough calculations, by also analyzing the convergence of the chiral expansion, see Ref.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The three terms, from the largest to the smallest, are the quantum electrodynamics (QED) contributions, the leading correction due to the finite size of the nucleus, δ FS (R c ) = m 3 r (Zα) 4 12 R 2 c (inh = c = 1 units and with Z and α being the proton number and fine structure constant, respectively), and the two-photon exchange (TPE) contribution. While quantum electrodynamical calculations of these atoms are extremely precise, effects due to the structure of the nucleus constitute the main source of uncertainty and are the bottleneck to increase the precision of the extracted radius.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Interpretations of the discrepancy are being sought into systematic experimental errors, novel aspects of hadronic structure, or beyond-the-standard-model theories, leading to lepton universality violations. To investigate whether the discrepancy persists or changes with the nuclear mass number A and proton number Z, the CREMA collaboration has embarked on a strong experimental program to extract the charge radii of light nuclei by measuring the Lamb shifts in µ-D, µ-3 He + and µ- 4 He + .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Recent developments in nuclear structure theory: an outlook on the muonic atom program

Hernandez¹,

Bacca²,

Wendt³

2017

Proceedings of 55th International Winter Meeting on Nuclear Physics — PoS(BORMIO2017)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The discovery of the proton-radius puzzle and the subsequent deuteron-radius puzzle is fueling an on-going debate on possible explanations for the difference in the observed radii obtained from muonic atoms and from electron-nucleus systems. Atomic nuclei have a complex internal structure that must be taken into account when analyzing experimental spectroscopic results. Ab initio nuclear structure theory provided the so far most precise estimates of important corrections to the Lamb shift in muonic atoms and is well poised to also investigate nuclear structure corrections to the hyperfine splitting in muonic atoms. Independently on whether the puzzle is due to beyond-the-standard-model physics or not, nuclear structure corrections are a necessary theoretical input to any experimental extraction of electric and magnetic radii from precise muonic atom measurements. Here, we review the status of the calculations performed by the TRIUMF-Hebrew University group, focusing on the deuteron, and discuss preliminary results on magnetic sum rules calculated with two-body currents at next-to-leading order. Two-body currents will be an important ingredient in future calculations of nuclear structure corrections to the hyperfine splitting in muonic atoms.

show abstract

Theory of the n=2 levels in muonic deuterium

Cited by 62 publications

References 68 publications

The deuteron-radius puzzle is alive: A new analysis of nuclear structure uncertainties

The deuteron-radius puzzle is alive: A new analysis of nuclear structure uncertainties

Accommodating three low-scale anomalies (g − 2, Lamb shift, and Atomki) in the framed Standard Model

Recent developments in nuclear structure theory: an outlook on the muonic atom program

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About