• Home
  • Search
  • π+−pElastic Scattering at 310 Mev: Phase-Shift Analysis
  • Cite Icon42
  • https://doi.org/10.1103/physrev.122.959Copy DOI Icon

π+−pElastic Scattering at 310 Mev: Phase-Shift Analysis

Show More
  • Abstract
  • Literature Map
  • References
  • Citations
  • Similar Papers
Abstract

A comprehensive phase-shift analysis of ${\ensuremath{\pi}}^{+}\ensuremath{-}p$ elastic-scattering data at 310-Mev incident-pion laboratory kinetic energy has been performed. The experimental data utilized include measurements of the differential and total cross sections and of the recoil-proton polarization. The $D$-wave phase shifts were found to be definitely needed in order to attain an adequate fit to the data. A general search for phase-shift solutions was carried out, using $S$-, $P$-, and $D$-wave phase shifts. One solution\char22{}of the Fermi type\char22{}was found that fits the data significantly better than any of the other solutions obtained. The calculated errors in the phase shifts of this set vary from 0.4 to 0.6 deg. Because it was felt that these errors might be deceivingly restrictive, the effects of small nuclear $F$-wave phase shifts on the results of the analysis were investigated and were found to be large: not only are the uncertainties in the original Fermi-type solution increased, but additional sets of phase shifts arise that fit the data well. One of these new solutions is similar to the original Fermi set except that the magnitudes of the phase shifts in this new fit are in general larger than those in the initial solution, and the signs of the $D$-wave phase shifts are reversed. The nuclear phase shifts in the original Fermi solution and their rms errors are (when $F$-wave phase shifts are allowed): ${S}_{3,1}=\ensuremath{-}17.2\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}2.6$ deg, ${P}_{3,1}=\ensuremath{-}2.9\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}4.0$ deg, ${P}_{3,3}=135.0\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}0.6$ deg, ${D}_{3,3}=3.1\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}2.6$ deg, ${D}_{3,5}=\ensuremath{-}4.9\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}2.1$ deg, ${F}_{3,5}=0.5\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}0.6$ deg, ${F}_{3,7}=\ensuremath{-}0.6\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}1.4$ deg. Although theory appears to favor this set, further theoretical and experimental evidence is desirable. The values given here for the first five phase shifts approximate the corresponding values obtained when the $F$-wave phase shifts were assumed negligible. However, all except ${P}_{3,3}$ fall outside the limits set by the small original errors. Inelastic-scattering processes were neglected during the phase-shift analysis. Calculations indicate that, if these processes could properly be taken into account, any changes in the quoted values of the phase shifts would probably be well within the corresponding errors given here. Extension of the phase-shift inquiries to include $G$ waves was attempted, but it was observed that the available data and theory do not allow the $G$-wave interaction to be significantly incorporated into the analysis.

Similar Papers
  • Research Article
  • Citations3

Effect of recent neutron-protonD-transfer measurements on phase-shift analysis near 325 MeV

  • Jul 01, 1978
  • Physical Review C
  • Ronald Bryan +2
  • Research Article
  • Citations109

Scattering Cross Sections in Argon from Electron Transport Parameters

  • Feb 01, 1982
  • Australian Journal of Physics
  • Gn Haddad +1
  • Research Article
  • Citations31

Cross-section measurements and phase shift analysis ofp-He4elastic scattering in the energy range 20-55 MeV

  • Nov 01, 1978
  • Physical Review C
  • A Houdayer +5
  • Research Article
  • Citations4

T=12, 32P- andS-WaveKπPhase Shifts

  • Jan 28, 1966
  • Physical Review
  • K C Gupta +2
  • Research Article
  • Citations54

Proton-Proton Effective-Range Theory with Vacuum Polarization

  • Oct 15, 1960
  • Physical Review
  • L Heller
  • Research Article

Theoretical investigation of nonlinear damping and nonlinear phase shift of spin-electromagnetic waves propagating in infinite multiferroics at sub-terahertz frequencies

  • Nov 01, 2015
  • Journal of Physics: Conference Series
  • I A Ustinova +3
  • Research Article
  • Citations27

Observation of a Goos-Hänchen-like Phase Shift for Magnetostatic Spin Waves.

  • Sep 24, 2018
  • Physical Review Letters
  • J Stigloher +6
  • Research Article
  • Citations60

Phase parameters for nucleon-deuteron scattering

  • Jun 01, 1971
  • Nuclear Physics, Section A
  • I.H Sloan
  • Research Article
  • Citations4

Improved Proton-Deuteron Phase-Shift Analysis Above the Deuteron Breakup Threshold and the Three-Nucleon Analyzing-Power Puzzle

  • Jun 01, 2002
  • Few-Body Systems
  • W Tornow +2
  • Research Article
  • Citations15

Reaction measurements and analyses for He3 + He4 at 15.95 MeV (c.m.)

  • Jul 01, 1977
  • Physical Review C
  • J A Koepke +1
  • Research Article
  • Citations15

Simulation of the Hard Core by a Velocity Dependence

  • Feb 15, 1963
  • Physical Review
  • Steven A Moszkowski
  • Research Article
  • Citations81

Kπscattering for isospin12and32in lattice QCD

  • Sep 17, 2012
  • Physical Review D
  • C B Lang +3
  • Research Article
  • Citations46

Reexamination of the astrophysicalSfactor for theα+d→6Li+γreaction

  • May 31, 2011
  • Physical Review C
  • A M Mukhamedzhanov +2
  • Research Article
  • Citations30

Stochastic variational method for elastic scattering

  • Jul 14, 2008
  • Physical Review A
  • J Y Zhang +1
  • Research Article
  • Citations24

The existence of electron-acoustic shock waves and their interactions in a non-Maxwellian plasma with q-nonextensive distributed electrons

  • Jul 01, 2013
  • Physics of Plasmas
  • Jiu-Ning Han +5
Cactus Communications logo

Copyright 2026 Cactus Communications. All rights reserved.