1 / 15

Forward Collisions and Spin Effects in Evaluating Amplitudes

Forward Collisions and Spin Effects in Evaluating Amplitudes. N. Akchurin, Texas Tech University, USA N. Buttimore , Trinity College Dublin, Ireland A. Penzo , INFN & Università di Trieste, Italy. Introduction. Polarized proton collisions probe dependence on spin

kevyn
Télécharger la présentation

Forward Collisions and Spin Effects in Evaluating Amplitudes

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Forward Collisionsand Spin Effects in Evaluating Amplitudes N. Akchurin, Texas Tech University, USA N. Buttimore, Trinity College Dublin, Ireland A. Penzo, INFN & Universitàdi Trieste, Italy

  2. Introduction • Polarized proton collisions probe dependence on spin • Analyticity relates low and high energy helicity amplitudes • Hadronicspin effectsare enhanced by photon exchange interference • Study forward spin dependence for cross section normalisation N Buttimore / Akchurin

  3. Peripheral Proton and Ion Collisions Hadronicspin dependence is important for • Parton distribution functions and nucleon form factors • Measuring the proton beam polarization at BNL RHIC, Makdisi, AIP Conf Proc 980 • Spin dependent couplings of the Pomeron, Trueman, Phys Rev D77 N. Buttimore, SPIN2010 Jülich

  4. Analyzing Power in CNI Region Interference value tc= 8pa /stot , hadronic slope B Bethe phase d ≈ 0.02, real-to-imaginary r≈ 0.02 Proton mass mand anomalous momentk= 1.7928 Analyses assume double-flip amplitude s are zero N. Buttimore, SPIN2010 Julich

  5. Global Fit to Small –t Data  E704 (p=200 GeV/c) RHIC (p=100 GeV/c) ☐ RHIC (√s= 200 GeV) N. Buttimore, SPIN2010 Jülich

  6. Phase Angle vs |r5| 1s 2s 3s N. Buttimore, SPIN2010 Jülich

  7. Conclusions • When all available small –tdata are analyzed, the hadronic spin flip is small (value…) • The magnitude of |r5|= 0.059 ± 0.008 and the phase angle q5= 94.1 ± 1.7 degrees • Only statistical experimental errors are considered in this analysis. The systematic errors need to be included especially when they are comparable or larger • pp data at 6.8 GeV suggest sizable hadronic spin flip… • Systematic errors in pC data need study as the fourth quadrant spin-flip phase is very different from the second quadrant pp phase • …. N. Buttimore, SPIN2010 Jülich

  8. Overlay Alek6.8GeV (do we need this?) maybe save it as a back up N. Buttimore, SPIN2010 Julich

  9. pCTojo Fit N. Buttimore, SPIN2010 Julich

  10. pCTojo Contours (1, 2 and 3 sigma) N. Buttimore, SPIN2010 Julich

  11. pCTojo Magnitude and Phase? N. Buttimore, SPIN2010 Julich

  12. pCJinnouchi Fit N. Buttimore, SPIN2010 Julich

  13. pCJinnouchi Contours (1, 2 and 3 sigma) N. Buttimore, SPIN2010 Julich

  14. pC Jinn Magnitude and Phase? N. Buttimore, SPIN2010 Julich

  15. Analyzing Power in CNI Region • For the current analyses, we assume double-flip amplitude is zero • The Coulomb phase is 0.02 • The rho parameter is 0.02 N. Buttimore, SPIN2010 Jülich

More Related