...
【24h】

QED confronts the radius of the proton

机译:QED面对质子的半径

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Recent results on muonic hydrogen (Pohl et al., 2010) 1 and the ones compiled by CODATA on ordinary hydrogen and ep-scattering (Mohr et al., 2008) 2 are 5 σ away from each other. Two reasons justify a further look at this subject: (1) One of the approximations used in Pohl et al. (2010) 1 is not valid for muonic hydrogen. This amounts to a shift of the proton's radius by ~3 of the standard deviations of Pohl et al. (2010) 1, in the "right" direction of data-reconciliation. In field-theory terms, the error is a mismatch of renormalization scales. Once corrected, the proton radius "runs", much as the QCD coupling "constant" does. (2) The result of Pohl et al. (2010) 1 requires a choice of the "third Zemach moment". Its published independent determination is based on an analysis with a p-value - the probability of obtaining data with equal or lesser agreement with the adopted (fit form-factor) hypothesis - of 3.92×10-12. In this sense, this quantity is not empirically known. Its value would regulate the level of "tension" between muonic- and ordinary-hydrogen results, currently at most ~4σ. There is no tension between the results of Pohl et al. (2010) 1 and the proton radius determined with help of the analyticity of its form-factors.
机译:最近关于μ子氢的结果(Pohl et al., 2010)[1]和CODATA编制的关于普通氢和ep散射的结果(Mohr et al., 2008)[2]彼此相距5 σ。有两个原因证明进一步研究这个主题是合理的:(1)Pohl等人(2010)[1]中使用的近似值之一对μ子氢无效。这相当于质子半径在Pohl等人(2010)[1]的标准差中偏移了~3,在数据核对的“正确”方向上。在场论术语中,误差是重整化尺度的不匹配。一旦校正,质子半径就会“运行”,就像QCD耦合“常数”一样。(2) Pohl et al. (2010) [1] 的结果要求选择“第三个 Zemach 时刻”。其公布的独立决定基于具有 p 值的分析 - 获得与所采用的(拟合外形因子)假设相等或更小一致的数据的概率 - 为 3.92×10-12。从这个意义上说,这个数量在经验上是未知的。它的值将调节μ子氢和普通氢结果之间的“张力”水平,目前最多为~4σ。Pohl等人(2010)[1]的结果与借助其外形因素的解析性确定的质子半径之间没有张力。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号