Paper detail

g Factor of Lithiumlike Silicon and Calcium: Resolving the Disagreement between Theory and Experiment

The bound-electron g factor is a stringent tool for tests of the Standard Model and the search for new physics. The comparison between an experiment on the g factor of lithiumlike silicon and the two recent theoretical values revealed the discrepancies of $1.7σ$ [D. A. Glazov $\textit{et al}$., Phys. Rev. Lett. $\textbf{123}$, 173001 (2019)] and $5.2σ$ [V. A. Yerokhin $\textit{et al}$., Phys. Rev. A $\textbf{102}$, 022815 (2020)]. To identify the reason for this disagreement, we accomplish large-scale high-precision computation of the interelectronic-interaction and many-electron QED corrections. The calculations are performed within the extended Furry picture of QED, and the dependence of the final values on the choice of the binding potential is carefully analyzed. As a result, we significantly improve the agreement between the theory and experiment for the g factor of lithiumlike silicon. We also report the most accurate theoretical prediction to date for lithiumlike calcium, which perfectly agrees with the experimental value.

preprint2022arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access5 authors1 topic

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.