Advertisement

Comparisons of (p,p′) and (p,n) Reaction Measurements

  • C. C. Foster

Abstract

Comparison of absolute differential cross-section values for the 12C(p,p′) reaction to the T=1, 15.11 MeV (1+) and 16.11 MeV (2+) states with absolute values for their respective analog states at 0.0 and 1.0 MeV excited by the 12C(p,n)12N reaction may be used to determine neutron detection efficiencies for large volume neutron detectors at intermediate energies as reported by C. A. Goulding at this conference. In doing this, use is made of the relation1
$$ 2\frac{{d\sigma }}{{d\Omega }}(p,p') = \frac{{d\sigma }}{{d\Omega }}(p,n) $$
which holds for such analog states when isospin conservation is assumed. In the case of 12C(p,p′) and 12C(p,n) reactions careful independent determinations of neutron detection efficiencies by using the 7Li(p,n)7Be reaction2 or by Monte Carlo calculation3 have established the validity of the relation to an accuracy of ± 10%. It is now interesting to consider how well comparisons using this relation, together with the facts that the (p,n) reaction T=0 targets excite T=1 states while the (p,p′) reaction excites both T=0 and T=1 states, may be employed to study other nuclei. In order to investigate this question, 28Si(p,p′) and 28Si(p,n)28P reaction data are compared at 62 and about 120 MeV proton energies in this paper.

Keywords

Neutron Detection Reaction Measurement High Excitation Energy Energy Acceptance Detector Telescope 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    R. K. Adair, Phys. Rev., 87: 1041 (1952).ADSMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    S. D. Schery, L. E. Young, R. R. Doering, S. M. Austin, and R. K. Bhowmik, Nucl. Instr. Meth., 147: 399 (1977).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    B. D. Anderson, Calculations of Neutron Detector Efficiencies, in: “Proceedings of Conference on the (p,n) Reaction and the Nucleon-Nucleon Force” (1979).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    C. D. Goodman, F. E. Bertrand, R. Madey, B. Anderson, A. Baldwin, J. Knudson, T. Whitten, J. Rapaport, D. Bainum, M. B. Greenfield, and C. C. Foster, Bull. Am. Phys. Soc., 22: 544 (1977).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    C. C. Foster, J. Rapaport, D. Bainum, C. D. Goodman, M. B. Greenfield, C. A. Goulding, R. Madey, and B. Anderson, unpublished (1978).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    P. P. Singh, S. Kailas, P. Schwandt, A. D. Bacher, J. Wiggins, D. L. Friesel, C. C. Foster, A. Van der Woude, and A. G. Drentje, Bull. Am. Phys. Soc., 24: 647 (1979).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    K. Van der Borg, M. N. Harakeh, S. Y. Van der Werf, A. Van der Woude, and F. E. Bertrand, Phys. Lett., 67B (1977).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    P. M. Endt and C. van der Leun, Nucl. Phys., A310 (1978) 238.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1980

Authors and Affiliations

  • C. C. Foster
    • 1
  1. 1.Indiana University Cyclotron Facility Physics DepartmentIndiana UniversityBloomingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations