Theoretical Studies of the Polarization-Analyzing Power Difference in 3H(p,n)3He and 15N(p,n)15O

  • R. J. Philpott
  • D. Halderson


Differences between the polarization (P) and the analyzing power (A) in (p,n) reactions connecting corresponding states in mirror nuclei have been of particular interest since it was pointed out by Haight et al.1 that such differences can arise only as a result of charge dependent effects. Comparison’ of early measurements of P and of A in the 3H(p,n)3He reaction at first suggested the existence of a small but significant (~17%) difference between P and A in the energy region Ep ~ 1.7 to 4 MeV. Subsequent remeasurement of both P and A, however, has shown2,3 that there is actually no difference to within experimental uncertainty. In sharp contrast to this result, sizable P-A differences have recently been observed3,4 in the 15N(p,n)15O reaction, extending over the energy region Ep ~ 4.5 to 9.5 MeV. The observed P-A difference is a rapidly fluctuating function of the incident energy, and appears to be intimately associated with some of the resonance structures which are prevalent in this energy region.


Splitting Strength Mirror Nucleus Neutron Channel Racah Coefficient Isospin Symmetry Breaking 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    R. C. Haight, J. J. Jarmer, J. E. Simmons, J. C. Martin, and T. R. Donoghue, Phys. Rev. Lett. 28: 1587 (1972).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    T. R. Donoghue, Sr. M. A. Doyle, H. W. Clark, L. J. Dries, J. L. Regner, W. Tornow, R. C. Byrd, P. W. Lisowski, and R. L. Walter, Phys. Rev. Lett. 37: 981 (1976).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    R. C. Byrd, Ph.D. Thesis (Duke University, 1978), unpublished.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    R. L. Walter and P. W. Lisowski, Proc. Internat. Conf. on the Interaction of Neutrons with Nuclei, E. Sheldon, ed., ( USERDA, Washington, 1976 ), p. 1061.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    H. E. Conzett, Phys. Lett. 51B: 445 (1974).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    L. G. Arnold, Bull. Am. Phys. Soc. 22:588 (1977) and unpublished preprint.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    D. Halderson and R. J. Philpott, Nucl. Phys. (to be published).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    R. J. Philpott, Nucl. Phys. A289: 109 (1977).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    G. Bertsch, J. Borysowicz, H. McManus and W. G. Love, Nucl. Phys. A284: 399 (1977).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    L. G. Arnold, R. G. Seyler, T. R. Donoghue, L. Brown, and U. Rohrer, Phys. Rev. Lett. 32: 310 (1974).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    D. Robson, Phys. Rev. 137: B535 (1965).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    A. M. Lane and R. G. Thomas, Rev. Mod. Phys. 30: 257 (1958).MathSciNetADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    R. J. Philpott, Nucl. Phys. A243: 260 (1975).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    R. J. Philpott, Phys. Rev. C12: 1540 (1975).ADSGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1980

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. J. Philpott
    • 1
  • D. Halderson
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PhysicsFlorida State UniversityTallahasseeUSA

Personalised recommendations