Paper detail

Evaluation of the strength of electron-proton scattering data for determining the proton charge radius

Precisely measured electron-proton elastic scattering cross sections [Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 105}, 242002 (2010)] are reanalyzed to evaluate their strength for determining the rms charge radius ($R_{\rm E}$) of the proton. More than half of the cross sections at lowest $Q^2$ are fit using two single-parameter form-factor models, with the first based on a dipole parametrization, and the second on a linear fit to a conformal-mapping variable. These low-$Q^2$ fits extrapolate the slope of the form factor to $Q^2$=0 and determine $R_{\rm E}$ values of approximately 0.84 and 0.89~fm, respectively. Fits spanning all $Q^2$, in which the single constants are replaced with cubic splines at larger $Q^2$, lead to similar results for $R_{\rm E}$. We conclude that the scattering data is consistent with $R_{\rm E}$ ranging from at least 0.84 to 0.89~fm, and therefore cannot resolve the discrepancy between determinations of $R_{\rm E}$ made using muonic and electronic hydrogen-atom spectroscopy.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors3 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.