1 / 14

New form factor parametrization Focus on Neutron

New form factor parametrization Focus on Neutron. ARIE BODEK University of Rochester http://www.pas.rochester.edu/~bodek/New-form-factors .ppt. Motivation.

zinna
Download Presentation

New form factor parametrization Focus on Neutron

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. New form factor parametrizationFocus on Neutron ARIE BODEK University of Rochester http://www.pas.rochester.edu/~bodek/New-form-factors.ppt Arie Bodek, Univ. of Rochester

  2. Motivation • Gep and Gmp fits by others will always be better then ours and will improve with time as more date in space-like and time-like region accumulate. For example, dispersion relation fits include both time like and space for Gmp and Gep data. Also there is a fit for Gmn. This kind of fit cannot be done for neutron Gen, since no time-like neutron Gen has been measured. There is some Gmn time-like data (not too much) • Therefore, use the world’s best Gep and Gmp for now and only fit neutron form factors as a ratio to proton form factors. This means that as proton form factors improve (at high Q2), our ratio fits still hold since they were fit to low Q2 data with duality constraints at high Q2. • For the region where the neutron data exist, the Kelly parametrization works very well, so we fit ratio of Gmn-data/Gmp (Kelly) and ( Gen-data/Gmn(Kelly)) /Gep (Kelly)/Gmp(Kelly). • We should compare Kelly Gmp, Gep and Gmn to the dispersion relations fits and to the duality fits. Arie Bodek, Univ. of Rochester

  3. New Kelly Parameterization – J. Kelly, PRC 70 068202 (2004) • Fit to sanitized dataset favoring polarization data. • Employs the following form (Satisfies power behavior of form factors at high Q2): --> introduces some theory constraints Gep, Gmp, and Gmn We will only use Kelly for Gmp and Gep Arie Bodek, Univ. of Rochester

  4. Kelly Parameterization Gep crosses zero at Q2 = 10. Arie Bodek, Univ. of Rochester Source: J.J. Kelly, PRC 70 068202 (2004).

  5. Dispersion Relations • Simone Pacetti http://microtron.iasa.gr/pavi06/ • http://microtron.iasa.gr/PAVI06/Talks/Pacetti_IIIb.pdf • 1) What can we learn about the ratio |G(p)(E)(q**2)/G(p)(M)(q**2)| by using space-like, time-like data and dispersion relations? • R. Baldini, M. Mirazita, S. Pacetti (Enrico Fermi Ctr., Rome & Frascati & • INFN, Perugia) , C. Bini, P. Gauzzi (Rome U. & INFN, Rome) , M. Negrini • (Ferrara U. & INFN, Ferrara) . 2005. 4pp. Prepared for 10th International Conference on Structure of Baryons • Â(Baryons 2004), Palaiseau, France, 25-29 Oct 2004. • Published in Nucl.Phys.A755:286-289,2005 • 2) A Description of the ratio between electric and magnetic proton • form-factors by using space-like, time-like data and dispersion relations. • R. Baldini (Chicago U., EFI & Frascati) , C. Bini, P. Gauzzi (INFN, Rome) • , M. Mirazita (Frascati) , M. Negrini (INFN, Ferrara) , S. Pacetti • (Frascati) . Jul 2005. 12pp. • Published in Eur.Phys.J.C46:421-428,2006 • e-Print Archive: hep-ph/0507085 • 3) Determination of nucleon and pion form-factors via dispersion • relations. • R. Baldini, E. Pasqualucci (Frascati) , S. Dubnicka (Bratislava, Inst. • Phys.) , P. Gauzzi (Rome U. & INFN, Rome) , S. Pacetti, Y. Srivastava • (Perugia U. & INFN, Perugia & Northeastern U.) . 2000. • Prepared for Workshop on the Structure of the Nucleon (Nucleon 99), • Frascati, Italy, 7-9 Jun 1999. • âPublished in Nucl.Phys.A666:38-43,2000 Arie Bodek, Univ. of Rochester

  6. Dispersion Relation --> Gep crosses zero at Q2=10agrees with Kelly - Yellow band Arie Bodek, Univ. of Rochester

  7. Dispersion fits to Gmp and Gmn Arie Bodek, Univ. of Rochester

  8. Constraint 1: Rp=Rn (from QCD) • From local duality R for inelastic, and R for elastic should be the same at high Q2: • We assume that Gen > 0 continues on to high Q2. • This constraint assumes that the QCD Rp=Rn for inelastic scattering, carries over to the elastic scattering case. This constraint is may be approximate. Extended local duality would imply that this applies only to the sum of the elastic form factor and the form factor of the first resonance. (First resonance is investigated by the JUPITER Hall C program) at high Q2. Arie Bodek, Univ. of Rochester

  9. Constraint 2: From local duality:F2n/F2p for Inelastic and Elastic scattering should be the same at high Q2 • In the limit of →∞, Q2→∞, and fixed x: • In the elastic limit: (F2n/F2p)2→(Gmn/Gmp)2 We do fits with d/u=0, .2 Arie Bodek, Univ. of Rochester

  10. Constraint 2 • In the elastic limit: (F2n/F2p)2→(Gmn/Gmp)2 . We use d/u=0, 0.2 This constraint assumes that the F2n/F2p for inelastic scattering, carries over to the elastic scattering case. This constraint is may be approximate. Extended local duality would imply that this applies only to the sum of the elastic form factor and the form factor of the first resonance. (First resonance is investigated by the JUPITER Hall C program) Arie Bodek, Univ. of Rochester

  11. 0.25 (d/u=0.0) 0.42875 (d/u=0.2) Constraints: R1 = (Gmn/Gmp )2 • We should fit R1= (Gmn/Gmp )2 (Kelly) • One for each value of (d/u)=0, 0.2 (at high x) Use a new variable y= 1/(1+Q2/A)n Where A and n are optimized R1(y) = e.g. polynomial (Cubic or higher) Depends on A and n y=1 is Q2 = 0 R1(y=1) =0.46912445 = (1.913/2.793) 2 y= 0 is Q2 = infinity R1(y=0) = 0.42875 or 0.25 R1(y) (1-y) What do dispersion fits say? Is it 0.25 or 0.43 ? Arie Bodek, Univ. of Rochester

  12. Fit to R2= (Gen/Gmn)2` / (Gep/Gmp)2 Use a new variable y= 1/(1+Q2/A)n Where A and n are optimized R2(y) = e.g. polynomial (Cubic or higher) depends on A and n. Or some other form. Kelly would be better Since it goes to 0 Q2=10 y= 0 is Q2 = infinity R2(y=0) = 1 y=1 is Q2 = 0 R2(y=1) = 0 R2(y) (1-y) What do dispersion fits say? Is Gep/Gmp agree with DIS QCD? Arie Bodek, Univ. of Rochester

  13. BBBA Kelly Comparison with Kelly ParameterizationKelly (our fits for Gep do not agree with Kelly or with dispersion fits. Arie Bodek, Univ. of Rochester

  14. Would like to see • Email sent to simone.pacetti@pg.infn.it He is redoing all the fits with most recent data (lost old analysis results) • Arie will meet with him in Italy Sept 8-17 in Perugia (he is INFN/U of Perugia, while attending the annual Perugia Science Conference • Does Gep, Gmp and Gep/Gmp for Kelly agree with Dispersion fits. • Does Gmn/Gmp for dispersion fits agree with local duality fits with d/u=0 or d/u=0.2 ? Or neither (which may mean that local duality needs to include first resonance). • Does Gep/Gmp Kelly and/or Dispersion agree with DIS QCD plus target mass calculation ,ala local duality? Arie Bodek, Univ. of Rochester

More Related