Advertisement

Polarization Phenomena in Nuclear Reactions

  • C. Glashausser
  • J. Thirion

Abstract

The recent appearance of high-intensity polarized beams with a small energy spread has made feasible a number of experiments which could not have been considered just a few years ago. In many reactions, polarization parameters can often be measured almost as easily as cross sections. The volume of experimental data can thus be expected to increase rapidly; the results should be precise and reliable. The problem of explaining the measurements and drawing from them all the information about nuclear structure and nuclear reaction mechanisms that they contain is likely to severely challenge standard reaction theories.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    A. Abragam and J. M. Winter, Phys. Rev. Letters 1: 375 (1958).ADSGoogle Scholar
  2. A. Abragam and J. M. Winter, Compt. Rend. 255: 1099 (1962).Google Scholar
  3. 2.
    R. Beurtey, in “Proceedings of the Second International Symposium on Polarization Phenomena of Nucleons, Karlsruhe, 1965” (P. Huber and H. Schopper, eds.), Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel (1966), p. 33.Google Scholar
  4. 3.
    W. Haeberli, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Sci. 17: 373, 1967.ADSGoogle Scholar
  5. 4.
    P. Huber and H. Schopper, eds., “Proceedings of the Second International Symposium on Polarization Phenomena of Nucleons, Karlsruhe, 1965,” Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel (1966).Google Scholar
  6. 5.
    J. M. Dickson, Progr. Nucl. Tech. Instr. 1: 105 (1964).Google Scholar
  7. 6.
    R. Keller, CERN reports 3141/j and 60–2, unpublished.Google Scholar
  8. 7.
    G. Clausnitzer, in “Proceedings of the Second International Symposium on Polarization Phenomena of Nucleons, Basel, 1960” (P. Huber and K. P. Meyer, eds.), Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel (1960).Google Scholar
  9. 8.
    H. F. Glavish, in “Proceedings of the Second International Symposium on Polarization Phenomena of Nucleons, Karlsruhe, 1965” (P. Huber and H. Schopper, eds.), Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel (1966), p. 850.Google Scholar
  10. P. Birien, Nucl. Instr. Methods, to be published.Google Scholar
  11. 9.
    R. Beurtey and J. Thirion, Nucl. Instr. Methods 33: 338 (1965).Google Scholar
  12. 10.
    R. Beurtey and J. M. Durand, Nucl. Instr. Methods, to be published.Google Scholar
  13. 11.
    W. P. Powell, in “Proceedings of the Second International Symposium on Polarization Phenomena of Nucleons, Karlsruhe, 1965” (P. Huber and H. Schopper, eds.), Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel (1966), p. 47.Google Scholar
  14. 12.
    R. Beurtey, Thesis, University of Paris, 1963, CEN-SACLAY Report No. R2366, unpublished.Google Scholar
  15. 13.
    J. Raynal, Thesis, University of Paris, 1963, CEN-SACLAY Report No. R2511, unpublished.Google Scholar
  16. 14.
    R. C. Johnson, Nucl. Phys. 35: 654 (1962).Google Scholar
  17. 15.
    L. Rosen and J. E. Brolley, Phys. Rev. 107: 1454 (1957).ADSGoogle Scholar
  18. R. M. Craig et al., Nucl. Instr. Methods 30: 269 (1964).Google Scholar
  19. 17.
    J. Arvieux, Thesis, University of Grenoble, 1967, unpublished.Google Scholar
  20. G. Clausnitzer et al., Phys. Letters 25B: 267 (1967).ADSGoogle Scholar
  21. 19.
    W. Haeberli, in “Proceedings of the Second International Symposium on Polarization Phenomena of Nucleons, Karlsruhe, 1965” (P. Huber and H. Schopper, eds.), Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel (1966), p. 64.Google Scholar
  22. W. Haeberli et al., Phys. Rev. Letters 15: 267 (1965).ADSGoogle Scholar
  23. W. Grübler et al., Phys. Letters 24B: 280 (1967).ADSGoogle Scholar
  24. W. Grübler et. al., Phys. Letters 24B: 335 (1967).ADSGoogle Scholar
  25. 20.
    T. K. Khoe and L. C. Teng, CERN Report No. 6319, 118 (1963), unpublished.Google Scholar
  26. 21.
    E. K. Zavoiskii, Soviet Phys. JETP (English Transi.) 5, 603 (1957).Google Scholar
  27. 22.
    B. Donally, T. Clapp, W. Sawyer, and M. Schultz, Phys. Rev. Letters 12: 502 (1964).ADSGoogle Scholar
  28. 23.
    B. Donally and W. Sawyer, in “Proceedings of the Second International Symposium on Polarization Phenomena of Nucleons, Karlsruhe, 1965” (P. Huber and H. Schopper, eds.), Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel (1966), p. 64.Google Scholar
  29. 24.
    W. Haeberli, Nucl. Instr. Methods 62: 355 (1968).Google Scholar
  30. 25.
    G. C. Phillips, in “Proceedings of the Paris Conference on Polarized Targets and Polarized Ion Sources, Paris, 1966.”Google Scholar
  31. 26.
    L. Rosen, in “Proceedings of the Second International Symposium on Polarization Phenomena of Nucleons, Karlsruhe, 1965” (P. Huber and H. Schopper, eds.), Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel (1966), p. 253.Google Scholar
  32. 27.
    J. D. Steben and M. K. Brussel, Phys. Rev. 146: 780 (1966).ADSGoogle Scholar
  33. 28.
    D. J. Baugh, J. A. R. Griffith, and S. Roman, Nucl. Phys. 83: 481 (1966).Google Scholar
  34. 29.
    P. Kossanyi-Demay, R. de Swiniarski, and C. Glashausser, Nucl. Phys. A94: 513 (1967).Google Scholar
  35. 30.
    C. Glashausser, P. Kossanyi-Demay, and R. de Swiniarski, J. Phys. (France), to be published.Google Scholar
  36. 31.
    R. M. Craig, J. C. Dore, G. W. Greenlees, J. Lowe, and D. L. Watson, Nuel. Phys. 79: 177 (1966).Google Scholar
  37. 32.
    J. Lowe and D. L. Watson, Phys. Letters 23: 261 (1966).ADSGoogle Scholar
  38. 33.
    Hudson B. Eldridge, Thesis, University of California at Los Angeles, 1967, unpublished.Google Scholar
  39. 34.
    D. L. Watson, J. Lowe, J. C. Dore, R. M. Craig, and D. J. Baugh, Nucl. Phys. A92: 193 (1967).Google Scholar
  40. 35.
    G. R. Satchler, Nucl. Phys. A92: 273 (1967).Google Scholar
  41. 36.
    G. W. Greenlees and G. J. Pyle, Phys. Rev. 149: 136 (1966).ADSGoogle Scholar
  42. 37.
    L. N. Blumberg, E. E. Gross, A. van der Woude, A. Zucker, and R. H. Bassel, Phys. Rev. 147: 812 (1966).ADSGoogle Scholar
  43. 38.
    M. P. Fricke, E. E. Gross, B. J. Morton, and A. Zucker, Phys. Rev. 156: 1207 (1967).ADSGoogle Scholar
  44. 39.
    T. A. Cahill, J. R. Richardson, and R. P. Haddock, Phys. Rev. 144: 932 (1966).ADSGoogle Scholar
  45. 40.
    R. M. Craig, J. C. Dore, J. Lowe, and D. L. Watson, Nucl. Phys. 86: 113 (1966).Google Scholar
  46. 41.
    V. E. Lewis, E. J. Burge, A. A. Rush, and D. A. Smith, Nucl. Phys. A101: 589 (1967).Google Scholar
  47. 42.
    Edmund T. Boschitz, Phys. Rev. Letters 17: 97 (1967).Google Scholar
  48. 43.
    L. J. B. Goldfarb, G. W. Greenlees, and M. B. Hooper, Phys. Rev. 144: 829 (1966).ADSGoogle Scholar
  49. 44.
    L. H. Thomas, Nature 117: 514 (1926).ADSGoogle Scholar
  50. 45.
    D. A. Lind, D. E. Heagerty, and J. G. Kelly, Bull. Am. Phys. Soc. 2: 104 (1965).Google Scholar
  51. 46.
    G. W. Greenlees, G. J. Pyle, and Y. C. Tang, Phys. Rev. Letters 17: 33 (1966).ADSGoogle Scholar
  52. 47.
    W. Heisenberg, “Theorie des Atomkernes,” Max Planck Institut für Physik, Göttingen (1951), p. 22.Google Scholar
  53. 48.
    G. E. Brown, Proc. Phys. Soc. (London) 70A: 361 (1957).ADSGoogle Scholar
  54. 49.
    S. Fernbach, W. Heckrotte, and J. Lepore, Phys. Rev. 97: 1059 (1955).ADSGoogle Scholar
  55. R. J. Blin-Stoyle, Phil. Mag. 46: 973 (1955).Google Scholar
  56. H. S. Köhler, Nucl. Phys. 9: 49 (1958).Google Scholar
  57. 50.
    H. C. Volkin, Bull. Am. Phys. Soc. 9: 439 (1964).Google Scholar
  58. 51.
    Donald W. L. Sprung and P. C. Bhargava, Phys. Rev. 156: 1185 (1967).ADSGoogle Scholar
  59. 52.
    M. B. Hooper, private communication.Google Scholar
  60. G. W. Greenlees et al., Nucl. Phys. 49, 496 (1963).Google Scholar
  61. 54.
    J. L. Adams, W. J. Thompson, and D. Robson, Nucl. Phys. 89: 377 (1966).Google Scholar
  62. 55.
    C. F. Moore and G. E. Terrell, Phys. Rev. Letters 16: 804 (1966).ADSGoogle Scholar
  63. 56.
    L. Veeser, J. Ellis, and W. Haeberli, Phys. Rev. Letters 18: 1063 (1967).ADSGoogle Scholar
  64. 57.
    G. R. Satchler, Nucl. Phys. 21: 116 (1960).MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  65. 58.
    S. Watanabe, Nucl. Phys. 8: 484 (1958).Google Scholar
  66. R. Beurtey et al., Compt. Rend. 256: 922 (1963).Google Scholar
  67. 60.
    J. Arvieux, T. Cahill, J. Goudergues, H. Krug, B. Mayer, and A. Papineau, J. Phys. (France), to be published.Google Scholar
  68. 61.
    P. Schwandt and W. Haeberli, Nucl. Phys. A110: 585 (1968).Google Scholar
  69. J. Arvieux et al., Phys. Letters 16: 149 (1965).ADSGoogle Scholar
  70. 63.
    J. Raynal, Phys. Letters 7: 281 (1963).ADSGoogle Scholar
  71. 64.
    J. Hufner and A. de Shalit, Phys. Letters 15: 52 (1965).ADSGoogle Scholar
  72. 65.
    E. F. Gibson, B. W. Ridley, J. J. Kraushaar, M. E. Rickey, and R. H. Bassel, Phys. Rev. 155: 1194 (1967).ADSGoogle Scholar
  73. W. E. Burcham et al., Compt. Rend. Congr. Intern. Phys. Nucl., Paris,1964, p. 877.Google Scholar
  74. 67.
    W. E. Frahn and G. Wiechers, Nucl. Phys. 74: 65 (1965).Google Scholar
  75. 68.
    J. Beery, private communication.Google Scholar
  76. 69.
    P. Darriulat, J. M. Fowler, R. de Swiniarski, and J. Thirion, in “Proceedings of the Second International Symposium on Polarization Phenomena of Nucleons, Karlsruhe, 1965” (P. Huber and H. Schopper, eds.), Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel (1966), p. 342.Google Scholar
  77. 70.
    C. Glashausser, R. de Swiniarski, J. Thirion, and A. D. Hill, Phys. Rev. 164: 1437 (1967).ADSGoogle Scholar
  78. 71.
    A. G. Blair, G. Glashausser, J. Goudergues, R. M. Lombard, B. Mayer, R. de Swiniarski, J. Thirion, and P. Vaganov, in “Proceedings of the International Nuclear Physics Conference, Tokyo, 1967.”Google Scholar
  79. 72.
    R. M. Craig, J. C. Dore, G. W. Greenlees, J. Lowe, and D. L. Watson, Nucl. Phys. 83: 493 (1966).Google Scholar
  80. 73.
    J. Lowe, private communication.Google Scholar
  81. 74.
    D. J. Baugh, M. J. Kenny, J. Lowe, D. L. Watson, and H. Wojciechowski, Nucl. Phys. A99: 203 (1967).Google Scholar
  82. 75.
    M. P. Fricke, E. E. Gross, and A. Zucker, Phys. Rev. 163: 1113 (1967).ADSGoogle Scholar
  83. M. P. Fricke, R. M. Drisko, R. H. Bassel, E. E. Gross, B. J. Morton, and A. Zucker, Phys. Rev. Letters 16: 746 (1966).ADSGoogle Scholar
  84. 76.
    D. L. Hendrie, N. K. Glendenning, B. G. Harvey, O. N. Jarvis, H. H. Duhm, J. Saudinos, and J. Mahoney, Phys. Letters 26B: 127 (1968).ADSGoogle Scholar
  85. 77.
    A. D. Hill, unpublished notes.Google Scholar
  86. 78.
    G. R. Satchler, Nucl. Phys. 55: 1 (1964).Google Scholar
  87. 79.
    H. Sherif and J. Blair, Phys. Letters 26B: 489 (1968).ADSGoogle Scholar
  88. 80.
    S. F. Eccles, H. F. Lutz, and V. A. Madsen, Phys. Rev. 141: 1067 (1966).ADSGoogle Scholar
  89. 81.
    N. K. Glendenning and M. Veneroni, Phys. Rev. 144: 839 (1966).ADSGoogle Scholar
  90. 82.
    G. R. Satchler, Nucl. Phys. 77: 481 (1966).Google Scholar
  91. 83.
    G. R. Satchler, Nucl. Phys. A95: 1 (1967).Google Scholar
  92. 84.
    A. Faessler, N. K. Glendenning, and A. Plastino, Phys. Rev. 159: 846 (1967).ADSGoogle Scholar
  93. 85.
    W. G. Love and G. R. Satchler, Nucl. Phys. A101: 424 (1967).Google Scholar
  94. 86.
    N. K. Glendenning, “Lectures at the Enrico Fermi Summer School, Varenna, 1967,” UCRL Report No. 17503.Google Scholar
  95. 87.
    J. D. Anderson, in “Proceedings of the Conference on Isobaric Spin, 1966,” Academic Press, New York (1966), p. 530.Google Scholar
  96. 88.
    B. D. Walker, C. Wong, J. D. Anderson, J. W. McClure, and R. W. Bauer, Phys. Rev. 137: B347 (1965).ADSGoogle Scholar
  97. B. D. Walker, C. Wong, J. D. Anderson, and J. W. McClure, Phys. Rev. 137: B1504 (1965).ADSGoogle Scholar
  98. 89.
    M. Fricke, Thesis, University of Minnesota, 1967, unpublished.Google Scholar
  99. G. R. Satchler, private communication.Google Scholar
  100. 90.
    G. R. Satchler, Phys. Letters 19: 312 (1965).ADSGoogle Scholar
  101. 91.
    R. Ballini, N. Cindro, J. Delaunay, J. Fouan, M. Loret, and J. P. Passerieux, Nucl. Phys. A97: 561 (1967).Google Scholar
  102. 92.
    W. A. Kolasinski, Thesis, University of Washington, 1967, unpublished.Google Scholar
  103. 93.
    K. A. Amos, V. A. Madsen, and I. E. McCarthy, Nucl. Phys. A94: 103 (1967).Google Scholar
  104. 94.
    V. A. Madsen, private communication.Google Scholar
  105. 95.
    P. H. Stelson, R. L. Robinson, H. J. Kim, J. Rapaport, and G. R. Satchler, Nucl. Phys. 68: 97 (1965).Google Scholar
  106. 96.
    S. T. Butler, Proc. Roy. Soc. (London), Ser. A 208: 559 (1951).ADSGoogle Scholar
  107. 97.
    J. A. Green and W. C. Parkinson, Phys. Rev. 127: 926 (1962).ADSGoogle Scholar
  108. 98.
    B. Hird, J. Cookson, and M. S. Bokhari, Proc. Phys. Soc. (London) 72: 489 (1958).ADSGoogle Scholar
  109. 99.
    R. G. Allas, R. W. Bercaw, and F. B. Shull, Phys. Rev. 127: 1252 (1962).ADSGoogle Scholar
  110. 100.
    G. F. Nemets, M. V. Pasechnik, and N. N. Purcherov, Nucl. Phys. 45: 1 (1963).Google Scholar
  111. 101.
    L. H. Reber and J. X. Saladin, Phys. Rev. 133: B1155 (1964).ADSGoogle Scholar
  112. 102.
    E. T. Boschitz and J. S. Vincent, NASA Report No. R-218, unpublished.Google Scholar
  113. 103.
    B. Hird and A. Strazalkowski, Proc. Phys. Soc. (London) 75: 868 (1960).ADSGoogle Scholar
  114. 104.
    S. E. Darden and A. J. Froelich, Phys. Rev. 140: B69 (1965).ADSGoogle Scholar
  115. 105.
    M. Ivanovich, H. Cords, and G. U. Din, Nucl. Phys. A97: 177 (1967).Google Scholar
  116. 106.
    J. C. Hensel and W. C. Parkinson, Phys. Rev. 110: 128 (1958).ADSGoogle Scholar
  117. 107.
    R. W. Bercaw and F. B. Shull, Bull. Am. Phys. Soc. 7: 269 (1962).Google Scholar
  118. 108.
    M. Takeda, S. Kato, C. Hu, and N. Takahashi, in Proc. Intern. Conf. Nucl. Struct., Kingston, Ont., 1960.Google Scholar
  119. 109.
    Donald G. Simons, Phys. Rev. 155: 1132 (1967).Google Scholar
  120. D. G. Simons and R. W. Detenbeck, Phys. Rev. 137: B1471 (1965).ADSGoogle Scholar
  121. Donald G. Simons, private communication.Google Scholar
  122. 110.
    M. S. Bokhari, J. A. Cookson, B. Hird, and B. Wessakul, Proc. Phys. Soc. (London) 72: 88 (1958).ADSGoogle Scholar
  123. 111.
    R. G. Allas and F. B. Shull, Phys. Rev. 116: 996 (1959).ADSGoogle Scholar
  124. 112.
    W. P. Johnson and D. W. Miller, Phys. Rev. 124: 1190 (1961).ADSGoogle Scholar
  125. 113.
    A. C. Juveland and W. Jentscke, Phys. Rev. 110: 456 (1958).ADSGoogle Scholar
  126. 114.
    A. Isoya, S. Micheletti, and L. H. Reber, Phys. Rev. 128: 806 (1962).ADSGoogle Scholar
  127. 115.
    J. E. Evans, J. A. Kuehner, and E. Almqvist, Phys. Rev. 131: 1632 (1963).ADSGoogle Scholar
  128. R. Beurtey et al., in “Conference on Direct Interactions and Nuclear Reaction Mechanisms” (E. Clementel and C. Villi, eds.), Gordon and Breach, Science Publishers, Inc., New York, (1963), p. 619.Google Scholar
  129. 117.
    N. S. Chant, P. S. Fisher, and D. K. Scott, Nucl. Phys. A99: 669 (1967).Google Scholar
  130. 118.
    J. E. Evans, Phys. Rev. 131: 1642 (1963).ADSGoogle Scholar
  131. 119.
    T. Yule and W. Haeberli, Phys. Rev. Letters 19: 756 (1967).ADSGoogle Scholar
  132. 120.
    A. Isoya and M. J. Marrone, Phys. Rev. 128: 800 (1962).ADSGoogle Scholar
  133. 121.
    R. Beurtey, R. Chaminade, A. Falcoz, R. Maillard, T. Mikumo, A. Papineau, L. Schecter, and J. Thirion, J. Phys. (France) 24: 1038 (1963).Google Scholar
  134. 122.
    R. W. Bercaw and F. B. Shull, Phys. Rev. 133: B632 (1964).ADSGoogle Scholar
  135. 123.
    S. Kato, N. Takahashi, M. Tahida, T. Yamazaki, and S. Yasukawa, Osaka University Report NO. ÒU-LNS 64–2, 1964, unpublished.Google Scholar
  136. 124.
    M. V. Pasechnik, L. S. Saltykov, and D. I. Tambovtzev, Zh. Eksperim. i Teor. Fiz. 43: 1575 (1963)Google Scholar
  137. English transl., Soviet Phys. JETP 16, 1111 (1963).Google Scholar
  138. 125.
    Sven A. Hjorth, J. X. Saladin, and G. R. Satchler, Phys. Rev. 138: B1425 (1965).ADSGoogle Scholar
  139. 126.
    N. S. Chant, private communication.Google Scholar
  140. 127.
    A. A. Rollefson, P. F. Brown, J. A. Burke, P. A. Crowley, and J. X. Saladin, Phys. Rev. 154: 1088 (1967).ADSGoogle Scholar
  141. 128.
    E. J. Ludwig and D. W. Miller, Phys. Rev. 138: B364 (1965).ADSGoogle Scholar
  142. 129.
    M. B. Hooper, Nucl. Phys. 76: 449 (1966).Google Scholar
  143. 130.
    R. C. Johnson, Nucl. Phys. A90: 289 (1967).Google Scholar
  144. 131.
    H. C. Newns, Proc. Phys. Soc. (London) A66: 477 (1953).ADSGoogle Scholar
  145. 132.
    D. F. Walls, Nucl. Phys. A90: 353 (1967).Google Scholar
  146. 133.
    S. T. Butler, in “Proceedings of the Rutherford Jubilee Conference, Manchester, 1961,” Heywood and Co., Ltd., London (1962), p. 492.Google Scholar
  147. 134.
    D. W. Miller, in “Proceedings of the Second International Symposium on Polarization Phenomena of Nucleons, Karlsruhe, 1965” (P. Huber and H. Schopper, eds.), Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel (1966), p. 410.Google Scholar
  148. 135.
    W. T. Pinkston and G. R. Satchler, Nucl. Phys. 72: 641 (1965).Google Scholar
  149. 136.
    R. C. Johnson and F. D. Santos, Phys. Rev. Letters 19: 364 (1967).ADSGoogle Scholar
  150. 137.
    R. C. Johnson, private communication.Google Scholar
  151. 138.
    R. C. Johnson, private communication from W. Haeberli.Google Scholar
  152. 139.
    S. T. Butler, Nature 207: 1346 (1965).ADSGoogle Scholar
  153. S. T. Butler, R. G. Hewitt, and R. M. May, Phys. Rev. Letters 26: 1033 (1965).ADSGoogle Scholar
  154. S. T. Butler, R. G. L. Hewitt, B. H. J. McKellar, and R. M. May, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 43: 282 (1967).ADSGoogle Scholar
  155. R. M. May and J. S. Truelove, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 43: 322 (1967).ADSGoogle Scholar
  156. 140.
    C. A. Pearson and M. Coz, Nucl. Phys. 82: 545 (1966).Google Scholar
  157. C. A. Pearson and M. Coz, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 39: 199 (1966).ADSGoogle Scholar
  158. C. A. Pearson and E. H. Auerbach, Phys. Letters 20: 418 (1966).ADSGoogle Scholar
  159. J. M. Bang and C. A. Pearson, Nucl. Phys. A100: 1 (1967).Google Scholar
  160. J. M. Bang, C. A. Pearson, and I. Pocs, Nucl. Phys. A100: 24 (1967).Google Scholar
  161. 141.
    C. F. Clement, Phys. Rev. Letters 17: 760 (1966).ADSGoogle Scholar
  162. 142.
    F. S. Levin, Nuovo Cimento IL B, 2: 200 (1967).Google Scholar
  163. 143.
    I. E. McCarthy, to be published.Google Scholar
  164. 144.
    C. F. Clement, Phys. Rev. Letters 20: 22 (1968).ADSGoogle Scholar
  165. 145.
    S. T. Butler, R. G. L. Hewitt, and J. S. Truelove, Phys. Letters 2613: 267 (1968).ADSGoogle Scholar
  166. 146.
    J. D. Garcia and C. A. Pearson, Phys. Rev. Letters 21: 301 (1968).ADSGoogle Scholar
  167. 147.
    C. A. Pearson, private communication.Google Scholar
  168. 148.
    (Note added in proof). The Butler predictions shown in Figs. 13 and 14 appear in an erratum (as yet unpublished) to the article by Butler, Hewitt, McKellar, and May.0.30 We are grateful to Professor W. Haeberli for informing us of these new predictions.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press 1969

Authors and Affiliations

  • C. Glashausser
  • J. Thirion

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations