Search for explanation of the neutron lifetime anomaly

A. Serebrov, M. Chaikovskii, G. Klyushnikov, O. Zherebtsov, A. Chechkin
{"title":"Search for explanation of the neutron lifetime anomaly","authors":"A. Serebrov, M. Chaikovskii, G. Klyushnikov, O. Zherebtsov, A. Chechkin","doi":"10.1103/PHYSREVD.103.074010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"All results of the neutron lifetime measurements performed in the last 20 years with the UCN storage method are in a good agreement. These results are also consistent with the latest most accurate measurements of the neutron decay asymmetry within the Standard Model. However, there is a significant discrepancy at $3.6\\sigma$ (1% of the decay probability) level between the averaged result of the storage method experiments and the most precise value obtained with the beam method. This article addresses the possible causes of that discrepancy. We focused on finding the spectrum of possible systematic corrections in the beam experiment. Four separate sources of the systematic errors which had not been properly addressed previously were considered. Two of those sources are related with the motion of protons in an electromagnetic field and the elastic scattering by the residual gas. These problems are associated with the geometrical configuration of the setup and the proton detector size. The Monte-Carlo simulation shows that these effects are negligible and do not affect measurement results. The third error concerns proton loss in the dead layer of the detector. It is shown that this correction requires a more detailed analysis than that given in the papers describing the beam measurement method. The fourth source of the systematic error is the charge exchange process on the residual gas. The influence of the residual gas was neglected in the beam method experiment. We present arguments that careful analysis of this issue is necessary since the proposed proton losses correction decreases the measured lifetime bringing it closer to the storage method results. Spectrum of possible corrections concerning this issue is investigated and it is shown that for the precise result, it is necessary to directly measure the concentration and composition of the residual gas inside the proton trap.","PeriodicalId":8464,"journal":{"name":"arXiv: Nuclear Experiment","volume":"46 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"arXiv: Nuclear Experiment","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1103/PHYSREVD.103.074010","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

Abstract

All results of the neutron lifetime measurements performed in the last 20 years with the UCN storage method are in a good agreement. These results are also consistent with the latest most accurate measurements of the neutron decay asymmetry within the Standard Model. However, there is a significant discrepancy at $3.6\sigma$ (1% of the decay probability) level between the averaged result of the storage method experiments and the most precise value obtained with the beam method. This article addresses the possible causes of that discrepancy. We focused on finding the spectrum of possible systematic corrections in the beam experiment. Four separate sources of the systematic errors which had not been properly addressed previously were considered. Two of those sources are related with the motion of protons in an electromagnetic field and the elastic scattering by the residual gas. These problems are associated with the geometrical configuration of the setup and the proton detector size. The Monte-Carlo simulation shows that these effects are negligible and do not affect measurement results. The third error concerns proton loss in the dead layer of the detector. It is shown that this correction requires a more detailed analysis than that given in the papers describing the beam measurement method. The fourth source of the systematic error is the charge exchange process on the residual gas. The influence of the residual gas was neglected in the beam method experiment. We present arguments that careful analysis of this issue is necessary since the proposed proton losses correction decreases the measured lifetime bringing it closer to the storage method results. Spectrum of possible corrections concerning this issue is investigated and it is shown that for the precise result, it is necessary to directly measure the concentration and composition of the residual gas inside the proton trap.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
寻找中子寿命异常的解释
近20年来用UCN储存方法进行的所有中子寿命测量结果都很吻合。这些结果也与标准模型中最新最精确的中子衰变不对称性测量结果一致。然而,在$3.6\sigma$(衰减概率的1%)水平上,存储方法实验的平均结果与束法获得的最精确值之间存在显着差异。本文讨论了造成这种差异的可能原因。我们的重点是在光束实验中寻找可能的系统修正谱。审议了以前没有适当处理的系统误差的四个不同来源。其中两个源与质子在电磁场中的运动和残余气体的弹性散射有关。这些问题与装置的几何结构和质子探测器的尺寸有关。蒙特卡罗仿真表明,这些影响可以忽略不计,不影响测量结果。第三个误差与探测器死层中的质子损失有关。结果表明,这种修正需要比描述光束测量方法的论文更详细的分析。系统误差的第四个来源是残余气体上的电荷交换过程。在束流法实验中忽略了残余气体的影响。我们提出的论点是,仔细分析这个问题是必要的,因为提出的质子损失修正减少了测量寿命,使其更接近存储方法的结果。研究了有关这一问题的可能修正谱,并表明为了得到精确的结果,有必要直接测量质子阱内残余气体的浓度和组成。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Observation of the near-threshold intruder 0− resonance in Be12 Photoneutron reactions on $^{\text{93}}$Nb at $E_{\gamma \text{max}}$=33-93 MeV. Search for a cosmologically relevant boson in muon decay Sub-threshold states in Ne19 relevant to F18(p,α)O15 Overview of the latest jet physics results from ALICE
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1