Paper detail

Qualitative difference between the angular anisotropy parameters in fast electron scattering and photoionization

It is demonstrated for the first time that in spite of well known big similarities between atomic ionization by photons and fast electrons, a qualitative difference exists in angular anisotropy parameters of electrons knocked out in these processes. The difference is disclosed here and attributed to distinction between normal (transverse) and virtual (longitudinal) photons. Formulas are derived for dipole and non-dipole angular anisotropy parameters in fast electronatom scattering. The ratio of quadrupole-to-dipole matrix elements is determined by the parameter ωR/v << 1 where ωis the transferred in collision energy, R is the ionized shell radius and v is the speed of projectile. This factor can be much bigger than in the case of photoionization, where one has the speed of light c that is much bigger than v . We illustrate general formulas by concrete results for outer s-subshells of noble gas atoms Ar and Xe. Even for very small transferred momentum q, in the so-called optical limit, the deviation from photoionization case is prominent and instructive.

preprint2011arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 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.