1 / 65

Recent progress in determination of fundamental constants (CODATA 2010-2014)

This article discusses the structure of input and output auxiliary data for determining fundamental constants and the progress made in this field. It also highlights the problems faced in the years 2006 to 2010 and outlines the importance of auxiliary data in the evaluation process.

lawrencef
Download Presentation

Recent progress in determination of fundamental constants (CODATA 2010-2014)

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Recent progress in determination of fundamental constants (CODATA 2010-2014) Savely G Karshenboim Pulkovo observatory (ГАО)(St. Petersburg) and Max-Planck-Institut für Quantenoptik (Garching)

  2. structure of input and output auxiliary data Rydberg and Rp me/mp a h mass of a particle independent constants G k (g-2)m progress: 2006 vs. 2010 problems Outline

  3. Auxiliary data = exact + the most accurate data which are to be evaluated prior the adjustment: R, me/mp, atomic masses. a related data: h/m, hNA ... h related data: e, e/h, ... The lines (  ) are equations: e.g., theoretical expressions for h/M, the Lamb shift, ... Some data are measured, a lot are derived: mp [kg], me [Mev/c2], ... G is uncorrelated,... h & related data Structure of the input data and output values Auxiliary input data a related data derived values independent data

  4. Auxiliary data = exact + the most accurate data which are to be evaluated prior the adjustment: R, me/mp, atomic masses. a related data: h/m, hNA ... h related data: e, e/h, NA ... The lines (  ) are equations: e.g., theoretical expressions for h/M, the Lamb shift, ... Some data are measured, a lot are derived: mp [kg], me [Mev/c2], ... G is uncorrelated; k, am, ... h & related data: h, e, NA Structure of the input data and output values Auxiliary input data: c, e0; R∞, Rp, me/mp • & related data: h/me, h·NA derived values independent data: G, k, am

  5. Auxiliary data = exact + the most accurate data which are to be evaluated prior the adjustment: R, me/mp, atomic masses. a related data: h/m, hNA ... h related data: e, e/h, NA ... The lines (  ) are equations: e.g., theoretical expressions for h/M, the Lamb shift, ... Some data are measured, a lot are derived: mp [kg], me [Mev/c2], ... G is uncorrelated; k, am, ... h & related data: h, e, NA Structure of the input data and output values Auxiliary input data: c, e0; R∞, Rp, me/mp • & related data: h/me, h·NA derived values independent data G am k

  6. equations: uncertainty: R∞ ~ 10-11 a ~ 10-9 – 10-10 a2 ~ 10-4× 10-9 Example: multiplicative vs. additive: R∞ vs. a `almost´ exact

  7. exact the most accurate: Auxiliary data

  8. Atomic & nuclear masses

  9. hydrogen & deuterium spectroscopy electron-proton elastic scattering Lamb shift in muonic hydrogen Rydberg constant

  10. hydrogen & deuterium spectroscopy electron-proton elastic scattering Lamb shift in muonic hydrogen LKP (Paris), MPQ (Garching),... Rydberg constant

  11. hydrogen & deuterium spectroscopy electron-proton elastic scattering Lamb shift in muonic hydrogen MAMI = Mainzer Mikrotron old world data Rydberg constant

  12. hydrogen & deuterium spectroscopy electron-proton elastic scattering Lamb shift in muonic hydrogen CREMA collaboration @ PSI Rydberg constant

  13. Proton radius puzzle

  14. cyclotron frequencies of e & p (UWash) g factor of a bound e in H-like ion (magnetic moment precession vs. ion cyclotron frequency) @ Mainz antiprotonic He spectroscopy (ASACUSA @ CERN) electron-to-proton mass ratio

  15. Electron mass: TGFC meeting 10-9Ar(e) Uwash-95 GSI-02 (C) GSI-04 (O) -3.9 parts in 1010 image charges interaction correction not applied CERN-06/10 2010 Anti-protonic Helium CODATA 2010 MPIK-14 [Ar(e)– 0.000 548 579 909 4] × 1012

  16. equations: me/mp mp in u mat in u input data a h/me h/mp h/mat a–related data

  17. equations: me/mp mp in u mat in u input data a h/me h/mp h/mat output h·NA a–related data

  18. a–related data

  19. QED vs. Penning trap: ae recoil spectroscopy h/mRb h/mCs quantum Hall standard vs calculable capacitor: RK a–related data

  20. QED vs Penning trap: ae recoil spectroscopy h/mRb h/mCs a–related data

  21. QED vs Penning trap: ae recoil spectroscopy h/mRb h/mCs 5-loop corrections to (g-2)e a–related data

  22. QED vs. Penning trap: ae recoil spectroscopy h/mRb h/mCs quantum Hall standard vs calculable capacitor: RK a–related data

  23. 2014 Input data related to the Fine-structure constant: TGFC meeting c2: 5.82 DOF: 2 Prob. c2: 5.8% RB: 1.71 Max. reduced residuals: 1.51, 1.70 ‘CODATA-14’ Rel. Unc.: 2.3 × 10-10

  24. Quantum Hall effect and a standard of resistance W. Poirier, Les Houches, 2007

  25. steps rational universal relation to a Needs for a `theory´ for QHE

  26. steps rational universal relation to a Needs for a `theory´ for QHE

  27. known from a block h·NA h/me input: h e NA output me mB h, e, NA and related data

  28. h, e, NA and related data

  29. h, e, NA and related data

  30. watt balance Avogadro constant from ehrhiched Si h, e, NA: the most important data

  31. watt-balance B. Jeanneret, Les Houches, 2007

  32. Josephson effect and quantum volt stardard B. Jeanneret, Les Houches, 2007

  33. watt-balance B. Jeanneret, Les Houches, 2007

  34. watt balance Avogadro constant from ehrhiched Si h, e, NA: the most important data

  35. monocrystale ~ 1 kg isotopic composition 28Si: 92% 29Si: 5% 30Si: 3% Monocrystale of 28Si

  36. monocrystale ~ 1 kg isotopic composition 28Si: 92% 99.985% 29Si: 5% 30Si: 3% Monocrystale of 28Si

  37. monocrystale ~ 1 kg isotopic composition 28Si: 92% 99.985% 29Si: 5% 30Si: 3% Monocrystale of 28Si

  38. monocrystale ~ 1 kg isotopic composition 28Si: 92% 99.985% 29Si: 5% 30Si: 3% Monocrystale of 28Si

  39. watt balance Avogadro constant from ehrhiched Si problem remains h, e, NA: the most important data 2006

  40. watt balance Avogadro constant from ehrhiched Si the problem remains in 2010 h, e, NA: the most important data

  41. 2014 Input data related to the Planck constant: TGFC meeting

  42. Planck constant (2015) Relative combined standard uncertainty 2.0  10–8 5.6  10–8 1.8  10–8

  43. h = 6.626 070 038(81) × 10-34 J sec [1.2 × 10-8] c2: 8.49 DOF: 4 Prob. c2: 7.52% RB: 1.45 Max. reduced residuals: 1.96, 1.84 The problem is resolved

  44. Independent constants

  45. dG/G ~ 10-4 Independent constants: G IESR, 2010 BIPM 1889 Kramer et al., 2006

  46. Independent constants: G 2002 1998 2006 2010

  47. Independent constants: G 2002 1998 2006 2010

  48. G= 6.67408(31)×10-11 m3kg-1s-2 [4.7×10-5]: TGFC meeting With expansion factor of 6.3 c2: 8.05 DOF: 13 Prob. c2: 84% RB: 0.79 Max. reduced residuals: -1.98, 1.44

  49. Independent constants: k 2010 2006

  50. 4b) 2014 Input data related to the Boltzmann constant: TGFC meeting c2: 5.50 DOF: 7 Prob. c2: 60.0% RB: 0.89 Max. reduced residuals: -1.28, 1.55

More Related