|
1.
|
V. Punjabi et al.
Show Abstract
This paper was published online on 20 May 2005 without several of the authors’ corrections incorporated. Equation (13) has been replaced. The captions of Figs. 16–18 have also been replaced. Typographical errors on pages 4, 6, 14, 15, 18, 19, 22, and 24 have all been corrected. The paper has been corrected as of 8 June 2005. The text is correct in the printed version of the journal.
Phys. Rev. C 71, 069902 (2005)
Cited 27 times
|
|
2.
|
V. Punjabi et al. Jefferson Lab Hall A Collaboration
Show Abstract
The ratio of the proton elastic electromagnetic form factors, GEp/GMp, was obtained by measuring Pt and Pℓ, the transverse and longitudinal recoil proton polarization components, respectively, for the elastic e→p→ep→reaction in the four-momentum transfer squared range of 0.5 to 3.5 GeV2. In the single-photon exchange approximation, GEp/GMp is directly proportional to Pt/Pℓ. The simultaneous measurement of Pt and Pℓ in a polarimeter reduces systematic uncertainties. The results for GEp/GMp show a systematic decrease with increasing Q2, indicating for the first time a definite difference in the distribution of charge and magnetization in the proton. The data have been reanalyzed and their systematic uncertainties have become significantly smaller than those reported previously.
Phys. Rev. C 71, 055202 (2005)
Cited 40 times
|
|
3.
|
M. K. Jones et al. (The Jefferson Lab Hall A Collaboration)
Show Abstract
The ratio of the proton's elastic electromagnetic form factors, GEp/GMp, was obtained by measuring Pt and Pℓ, the transverse and the longitudinal recoil proton polarization, respectively. For elastic e→p→ep→, GEp/GMp is proportional to Pt/Pℓ. Simultaneous measurement of Pt and Pℓ in a polarimeter provides good control of the systematic uncertainty. The results for the ratio GEp/GMp show a systematic decrease as Q2 increases from 0.5 to 3.5 GeV2, indicating for the first time a definite difference in the spatial distribution of charge and magnetization currents in the proton.
Phys. Rev. Lett. 84, 1398 (2000)
Cited 195 times
|