DIFFERENT TREATMENTS OF NUCLEAR BINDING EFFECT IN DEEP INELASTIC LEPTON NUCLEUS SCATTERING

  • We show that two models in explaining the EMC effect give different results and predictions,though both of them are using certain ways to take into account the binding effect.The first can explain the bulk of the EMC effect only,whereas the second can explain,besides the bulk of the EMC effect,the detailed features of the SLAC data and the discrepancies between the EMC data and the SLAC data.The two models also give dfferent predictions of the ratio RALT in deep inelastic lepton nucleus scattering.It seems that the available data favour the second model.
  • 加载中
  • [1] EMC, J. J. Aubert et al., Phys. Lettt., 123B(1983), 275.[2] A. Bodek et al., Phys. Rev. Lett., 50(1983), 1431; 51(1983), 534.[3] A. Bodek and J. L. Ritchie, Phys. Rev., D23(1981), 1070; D24(1981), 1400.[4] See, e. g., R. L. Jaffe, Phys. Rev. Lett., 50(1983), 228; for a review, see, e. g., A. Krzywicki, Nucl. Phys.,A446(1985), 135c.[5] C. A. Garcia Canal et al., Phys. Rev. Lett., 53(1984), 1430; M. Staszel et al., Phys. Rev., D29(1984), 2638.[6] S. V. Akulinichev et al., Phys. Rcv. Lett., 55(1985), 2239 and J. Phys., 611(1985), L245; see also, e. g.,B. L. Birbrair et al., Phys. Lett. 166B(1986), 119.[7] 马伯强、孙估,高能物理与核物理,11(1987),430.[8] E. J. Moniz, Phys. Rev., 184(1969), 1154; see also, e. g., T. W. Donnelly and J. D. Walecka, Ann. Rcv.Nucl. Sci., 25(1975), 329[9] E. J. Monk et al., Phys. Rev. Lett., 26(1971), 445; R. R. Whitney et al., Phys. Rev, C9(1974), 2230.[10] T. de Forest, Jr., Nucl. Phys., A392(1983), 232; A. E. L. Dieperink et al., Phys. Lett., 63B(1976), 261.[11] M. B. Johnson and J. Speth, Nucl. Phys., A470(1987), 488.[12] BCDMS, A. C. Benvenuti et al., Phys. Lett., 189B(1987), 483; G. Bari et al., ibid., 163B(1985), 282; EMC,P. R. Norton, Proc. Int. Conf. High Energy Phys., Berkley, 1986.[13] A. Bodek et al., Phys. Rev., D20(1979), 1471.[14] A. J. Buras and K. J. F. Gaemers, Nucl. Phys., B132(1978), 249.[15] D. W. Duke and J. F. Owens, Phys. Rev., D30(1984), 49.[16] S. Stein et al., Phys. Rev., D12(1975), 1884.[17] R. G. Arnold et al., Phys. Rev. Lett., 52(1984), 727.[18] EMC, J. J. Aubert et al., Nucl. Phys., B272(1986), 158.[19] P Buchholz, Proc EPS Conf. High Energy Phys, Bari, 1985.[20] EMC, J. J. Aubert et al., Nucl. Phys., B259(1985), 189.[21] R. D. Smith, Phys. Lett., 182B(1986), 283.
  • 加载中

Get Citation
MA Bo-Qiang and SUN Ji. DIFFERENT TREATMENTS OF NUCLEAR BINDING EFFECT IN DEEP INELASTIC LEPTON NUCLEUS SCATTERING[J]. Chinese Physics C, 1988, 12(6): 786-792.
MA Bo-Qiang and SUN Ji. DIFFERENT TREATMENTS OF NUCLEAR BINDING EFFECT IN DEEP INELASTIC LEPTON NUCLEUS SCATTERING[J]. Chinese Physics C, 1988, 12(6): 786-792. shu
Milestone
Received: 1900-01-01
Revised: 1900-01-01
Article Metric

Article Views(2249)
PDF Downloads(424)
Cited by(0)
Policy on re-use
To reuse of subscription content published by CPC, the users need to request permission from CPC, unless the content was published under an Open Access license which automatically permits that type of reuse.
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Email This Article

Title:
Email:

DIFFERENT TREATMENTS OF NUCLEAR BINDING EFFECT IN DEEP INELASTIC LEPTON NUCLEUS SCATTERING

    Corresponding author: MA Bo-Qiang,
  • Peking University,Beijing

Abstract: We show that two models in explaining the EMC effect give different results and predictions,though both of them are using certain ways to take into account the binding effect.The first can explain the bulk of the EMC effect only,whereas the second can explain,besides the bulk of the EMC effect,the detailed features of the SLAC data and the discrepancies between the EMC data and the SLAC data.The two models also give dfferent predictions of the ratio RALT in deep inelastic lepton nucleus scattering.It seems that the available data favour the second model.

    HTML

Reference (1)

目录

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return