Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Comparison of quasi-elastic cross sections using spectral functions with (e,e') data from 0.5 GeV to 1.5 GeV Hiroki Nakamura (Waseda U). Makoto Sakuda.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Comparison of quasi-elastic cross sections using spectral functions with (e,e') data from 0.5 GeV to 1.5 GeV Hiroki Nakamura (Waseda U). Makoto Sakuda."— Presentation transcript:

1 Comparison of quasi-elastic cross sections using spectral functions with (e,e') data from 0.5 GeV to 1.5 GeV Hiroki Nakamura (Waseda U). Makoto Sakuda (Okayama U.) Ryoichi Seki (CSUN,Caltech)

2 Introduction Goal is to calculate -A (mainly quasi-elastic) cross sections with appropriate Nuclear Effects and Form Factors. Nuclear Effects and Form Factors are verified with comparing C,O(e,e’) data. Spectral function vs. Fermi Gas model (NuInt04 hep-ph/0409300 ) The latest form factors are compared with dipole form factor. Pauli blocking and Final State Interaction.

3 Vertex Correction Final State Interaction Initial State Nuclear Effect on QE -A -A reaction ~ -N with Nuclear Effect 3 Stages of Nuclear Effect ` Quasi-elastic  Fermi gas, spectral function Pauli blocking, optical potential

4 Quasielastic -A and e-A Comparison Nuclear Effect between -A and e-A –Initial State of Nucleons: Same Fermi gas, Spectral function –Final State Interaction: Same Pauli Blocking, Optical potential,… Information obtained from e-A –Vector Form Factors –Initial State of Nucleons –FSI

5 Differential Cross Section A(e,e’) cross section p : initial nucleon momentum, q : momentum transfer,  : energy transfer

6 Form Factors The latest form factors are used. Brash et al., PRC65,051001(2002). Bosted PRC51,409(1995) Axial form factor: dipole

7 Fermi Gas Model Non-interacting and uniform Fermi Gas Model (Moniz) Initial State : Fermi Gas Final State Interaction: Pauli Blocking Fermi Gas Pauli Blocking

8 Spectral Function More realistic model than FG Initial State: realistic spectral function (Benhar et al.) (single particle + correlation with local density approx.) 0. 300. P (MeV/c) 20. 40. E (MeV) P h ( p;! )= 1 E p P ( p;! ) Probability of removing a nucleon of momentum p with excitation energy E.

9 Momentum Distribution Momentum distribution of a nucleon in nucleus. Spectral function has long tail due to correlation.

10 Pauli Blocking for Spectral function model PWIA (no Pauli blocking) Simple Pauli Blocking ( same as FG) Modified Pauli Blocking Sum rule for uniform Nuclear Matter  ~ 0.4  0

11 Experimental Data 16 O(e,e’) : E=700-1500 MeV  =32 deg Anghinolfi et al., NPA602(’96),405. 12 C(e,e’) : E=780 MeV  =50.4 deg Garino et al., PRC45(’92),780. E=500 MeV  =60 deg Whittney et al., PRC9(’74),2230.

12 QE  Resonance (e,e’): Fermi Gas vs. Spectral function Data: 16 O(e,e’) E=1080 MeV  =32 deg FG > SF at peak. SF agrees better with data. SF can explain ‘dip region’, because of ‘correlation’.

13 16 O(e,e’)  =32 deg E=700,880,1080,1200 MeV

14 12 C(e,e’) quasielastic E=500MeV  =60 deg E=780 MeV  =50.4 deg Red: spectral func Blue: Fermi Gas

15 16 O(   - ) QE E=800 MeV d  /dQ 2 E=800MeV – Blue:Fermi Gas – Red: Spectral Function+PWIA – Green: Spectral Function + Pauli Blocking Pauli Blocking has large effect at small Q. 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 00.20.40.60.811.21.4 d  /dQ 2 [10 -18 fm 2 /MeV 2 ] Q 2 [GeV 2 ] E = 800 MeV SF SF+PB FG

16 16 O(   - ) QE E=800 MeV d  /dE  E=800MeV – Blue:Fermi Gas – Red: Spectral Function +PWIA – Green: Spectral Function + Pauli Blocking Clear difference at peak (FG > SP). – FG has low-energy-transfer nucleons more than SF. 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 0100200300400500600700800 d  /dE lep [10 -14 fm 2 /MeV] E lep [MeV] E = 800 MeV SF SF+PB FG

17 16 O(   - ) QE E=2000 MeV d  /dE  d  /dQ 2 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 0500100015002000 d  /dE lep [10 -14 fm 2 /MeV] E lep [MeV] E = 2000 MeV SF SF+PB FG 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 00.511.522.533.54 d  /dQ 2 [10 -18 fm 2 /MeV 2 ] Q 2 [GeV 2 ] E = 2000 MeV SF SF+PB FG

18 Form Factor: Dipole vs. Latest The latest form factor make smaller cross sections at QE peak than dipole. Difference: < 10% (e,e’) (  )

19 Pauli Blocking for Spectral function model PWIA (no Pauli blocking) Simple Pauli Blocking ( same as FG) Modified Pauli Blocking Sum rule for uniform NM  ~ 0.4  0

20 Comparison of Pauli Blocking Simple PB suppresses cross section at small Q 2, more strongly than Modified PB. O(  )

21 Final State Interaction Simple approach is tried here. Optical Potential Model Imaginary part of potential On-shell condition of recoiled nucleon is changed:  =0.16 fm -3 Nuclear Matter density  NN = 40 mb Typical value of NN cross section

22 16 O(e,e’)  =32 deg: QE with FSI E=700,1080 MeV Red: Spectral Function Green: Fermi Gas Blue: SF+FSI SP +FSI < SP only SP+FSI: broader width. Difference 10% at peak

23 Summary Systematic comparison of the model calculation with A(e,e’) data in the wide energy range with the latest form factors. (e,e’): SF agrees better with the experimental data than FG, in particular, at dip region. (,  ): More than 20 % difference between FG and SF shows at d  /dE  peak. Pauli blocking should be verified by forward e-A scattering data. Appropriate FSI is necessary.

24 N-  Form Factors Paschos et al. PRD69,014013(2004),


Download ppt "Comparison of quasi-elastic cross sections using spectral functions with (e,e') data from 0.5 GeV to 1.5 GeV Hiroki Nakamura (Waseda U). Makoto Sakuda."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google