SciPost Submission Page
Measurement of 3He analyzing power for p-3He scattering using the polarized 3He target
by A. Watanabe, S. Nakai, K. Sekiguchi, T. Akieda, D. Etoh, M. Inoue, Y. Inoue, K. Kawahara, H. Kon, K. Miki, T. Mukai, D. Sakai, S. Shibuya, Y. Shiokawa, T. Taguchi, H. Umetsu, Y. Utsuki, Y. Wada, M. Watanabe, M. Itoh, T. Ino, T. Wakui, K. Hatanaka, H. Kanda, H. J. Ong, D. T. Tran, S. Goto, Y. Hirai, D. Inomoto, H. Kasahara, S. Mitsumoto, H. Oshiro, T. Wakasa, Y. Maeda, K. Nonaka, H. Sakai and T. Uesaka
This is not the current version.
|As Contributors:||Atomu Watanabe|
|Date submitted:||2019-11-05 01:00|
|Submitted by:||Watanabe, Atomu|
|Submitted to:||SciPost Physics Proceedings|
|Proceedings issue:||24th European Few Body Conference (University of Surrey, U.K.)|
Proton–3He scattering is one of the good probes to study the T = 3/2 channel of three– nucleon forces. We have measured 3He analyzing powers for p−3He elastic scattering with the polarized 3He target at 70 and 100 MeV. In the conference the data were com- pared with the theoretical predictions based on the modern nucleon–nucleon potentials. Large discrepancies were found between the data and the calculations at the angles where the 3He analyzing power takes the minimum and maximum values.
Submission & Refereeing History
You are currently on this page
Reports on this Submission
Anonymous Report 1 on 2019-12-2 (Invited Report)
- Cite as: Anonymous, Report on arXiv:scipost_201911_00016v1, delivered 2019-12-02, doi: 10.21468/SciPost.Report.1355
This proceedings is very nicely written. The presented work is very interesting and up to date. I wait for more results from RCNP on p-3He scattering.
From my point of view it would be very interesting to see the plot of polarization changing in the time of the experiment. I would also appreciate if the authors
estimated the (systematic) uncertainty of the measured polarization (40%+/-...) or to present the approach to establish such error. How accurate is you method ?
"Three–nucleon forces (3NFs) are essentially important to clarify various nuclear
properties such as few–nucleon scattering."
maybe better word will be "phenomena" instead of "properties".
2- at the end of the 3'rd section:
"A experimental setup" -> "An experimental setup"
"... the theoretical prediction of the CD–Bonn potential with ∆ degrees of freedom"
maybe more precise:
"... the theoretical predictions of the CD–Bonn potential with ∆-isobar degrees of freedom included".