previous next Up Title Contents Index

7.7 Discussion of the Result and
Calculation of the Scattering Length a1-a3

Since the main topic of the measurements with the LH2 target was the calibration of the calorimeter with photons [Slo98] an optimal setup for a more precise determination of the Panofsky ratio was not achieved. In order to reduce the error due to acceptance correction and software cuts, the use of a properly designed collimator in front of the calorimeter seems to be preferable. Furthermore the response function of photons must be examined in more detail, despite the fact that the energy resolution and shower parameters could be matched well by the simulation. The shape of the distribution of SCX-photons is very sensitive to an assumed energy resolution function. Thus even a small deviation between the simulated response and the `real' response function (which is not significant for monoenergetic photons) resulted in a relatively high systematical error for this measurement. Although major effort was put into the understanding of the shower distribution of photons at different energies a large contribution to the measurement error could not be avoided.

Author
Year, Reference
P
error
Panofsky et al.
[Pan50]
(0.94)
(0.30)
Sargent et al.
1955 [36]
1.10
0.50
Cassels et al.
19571
1.50
0.15
Fischer et al.
19581
(1.87)
(0.10)
Kuehner et al.
19591
1.60
0.17
Koller
19591
1.46
0.10
Dunaitsev et al.
19601
(1.40)
(0.08)
Derrick et al.
19601
1.47
0.1
Samios
19601
(1.62)
(0.06)
Jones et al.
19611
1.56
0.05
Cocconi et al.
[Coc61]
1.533
0.021
Ryan
[Rya63]
1.51
0.04
Spuller et al.
[Spu77]
1.546
0.009
This work

1.546
0.010
Table 7-3 Compilation of all published determinations of the Panofsky ratio. The values in brackets have not been used to calculate the weighted average. A weighted average of all the measurements of P (listed in Table 7-3) which are in good agreement gives 1.543±0.006. For the calculation of the s-wave pion-nuclear cross-section b1, the transition amplitude at threshold contributes the largest uncertainty. This uncertainty is limited by the extrapolation to the threshold; but is expected to be reduced by further measurements with energies closer to the p N threshold and electron-deuteron scattering [Han97]. However a more accurate P value can reduce ambiguities in the determination of either or b1. Since the theoretical calculation of is model dependent, we have taken the most actual determination of by the E643 collaboration [Kov97]. Their value[37] of -31.5±0.8*10-3/m p coincides with the theoretical prediction using either low energy theorem [Bae70] or chiral perturbation theory [Ber96]. The s-wave scattering length also is available through spectroscopy of pionic atoms [Sig96]. Nevertheless, the determined value for a1-a3 differs for both approaches. A recent value from pionic-atom spectroscopy is at -0.2760±0.0125 [Sch97] as opposed to -0.253[38], both in units of m p -1. A refined calculation of the p N s-wave scattering length following Weinberg's current algebra [Ber96] puts the limits between -0.288 and -0.264. On the other hand a calculation of the SCX scattering amplitude f based on a compilation of all available p N scattering data at low energies gives -0.0248±0.0045 [Mat97] for the extrapolation to the threshold.

However, the latest analysis of the width of the 3p-1s line of pionic Hydrogen and Deuterium including Doppler-shift corrections determined -0.2604±0.0043 (preliminary) [Bad98]. Taking P from this work one obtains -0.252±0.006 for a1-a3 that translates into -0.085±0.002 for b1. Thus there is evidence that the systematical discrepancy in the obtained scattering length disappears; although a further reduction of the measurement errors is needed. In fact, this calls for further studies of the s-wave scattering amplitude at threshold.


[36] Quoted accordingly to [Rya63]

[37] So far, only the statistical error is given; a more detailed analysis is to be expected in 1999

[38] No error given [Han97], but typically of about 3%


previous next Up Title Contents Index