Muonic news Muonic hydrogen and deuterium Randolf Pohl Randolf - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
muonic news
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Muonic news Muonic hydrogen and deuterium Randolf Pohl Randolf - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Jan 28, 2024 379 likes •1.63k views

Shrinking the Proton Laser spectroscopy for nuclear physics and fundamental constants Muonic news Muonic hydrogen and deuterium Randolf Pohl Randolf Pohl JGU, Mainz MPQ, Garching for the CREMA collaboration 1 Collaborators CREMA (Charge

slide-1
SLIDE 1

Muonic news

Muonic hydrogen and deuterium

Randolf Pohl

Shrinking the Proton

Laser spectroscopy for nuclear physics and fundamental constants

Randolf Pohl

JGU, Mainz MPQ, Garching

for the

CREMA collaboration

1

slide-2
SLIDE 2

Collaborators

CREMA (Charge Radius Experiment with Muonic Atoms) at PSI

  • A. Antognini, K. Kirch, F. Kottmann, B. Naar, K. Schuhmann,
  • D. Taqqu

ETH Zürich, Switzerland

  • M. Diepold, B. Franke, J. Götzfried, T.W. Hänsch, J. Hartmann,
  • T. Kohlert, J. Krauth, F. Mulhauser, T. Nebel, R. Pohl

MPQ, Garching, Germany

→ JGU, Mainz, Germany

  • M. Hildebrandt, A. Knecht, A. Dax

PSI, Switzerland

  • F. Biraben, P

. Indelicato, E.-O. Le Bigot, S. Galtier, L. Julien, F. Nez,

  • C. Szabo-Foster

Laboratoire Kastler Brossel, Paris, France F.D. Amaro, J.M.R. Cardoso, L.M.P . Fernandes, A.L. Gouvea, J.A.M. Lopez, C.M.B. Monteiro, J.M.F. dos Santos Uni Coimbra, Portugal D.S. Covita, J.F.C.A. Veloso Uni Aveiro, Portugal

  • M. Abdou Ahmed, T. Graf, A. Voss, B. Weichelt

IFSW, Uni Stuttgart, Germany T.-L. Chen, C.-Y. Kao, Y.-W. Liu

  • Nat. Tsing Hua Uni, Hsinchu, Taiwan

P . Amaro, J.P . Santos Uni Lisbon, Portugal

  • L. Ludhova, P

.E. Knowles, L.A. Schaller Uni Fribourg, Switzerland

  • A. Giesen

Dausinger & Giesen GmbH, Stuttgart, Germany P . Rabinowitz Uni Princeton, USA

Hydrogen group at MPQ

  • A. Beyer, A. Grinin, L. Maisenbacher, A. Matveev, C.G. Parthey,
  • J. Alnis, D.C. Yost, E. Peters, R. Pohl, Th. Udem, T.W. Hänsch

MPQ, Garching, Germany

  • K. Khabarova, N. Kolachevksy

Lebedev Inst., Moscow, Russia

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 2

slide-3
SLIDE 3

The proton radius puzzle

[fm]

ch

Proton charge radius R

0.83 0.84 0.85 0.86 0.87 0.88 0.89 0.9

CODATA-2014 H spectroscopy e-p scatt. p 2010 µ p 2013 µ

σ 5.6

The proton rms charge radius measured with electrons: 0.8751 ± 0.0061 fm muons: 0.8409 ± 0.0004 fm

RP , Gilman, Miller, Pachucki, Annu. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 63, 175 (2013).

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 3

slide-4
SLIDE 4

The proton radius puzzle

[fm]

ch

Proton charge radius R

0.83 0.84 0.85 0.86 0.87 0.88 0.89 0.9

CODATA-2014 H spectroscopy e-p scatt. p 2010 µ p 2013 µ

σ 5.6

The proton rms charge radius measured with electrons: 0.8751 ± 0.0061 fm muons: 0.8409 ± 0.0004 fm

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 3

slide-5
SLIDE 5

The proton radius puzzle???

The proton rms charge radius measured with electrons: 0.8751 ± 0.0061 fm CODATA muons: 0.8409 ± 0.0004 fm

[fm]

ch

Proton charge radius R

0.83 0.84 0.85 0.86 0.87 0.88 0.89 0.9

CODATA-2014 H spectroscopy e-p scatt. Belushkin et al. 2007 Lorenz et al. 2012 p 2010 µ p 2013 µ d 2016 µ Hill, Paz 2010 Lee, Arrington, Hill 2015 Sick 2012 Peset, Pineda 2015 Horbatsch, Hessels 2015 Griffioen, Carlson, Maddox 2016 Higinbotham et al. 2016 Horbatsch, Hessels, Pineda 2016

?? σ 5.6

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 3

slide-6
SLIDE 6

Muons in the news

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 4

slide-7
SLIDE 7

Muons in the news

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 4

slide-8
SLIDE 8

Muons in the news

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 4

slide-9
SLIDE 9

Muons in the news

  • J. Bernauer, RP

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 4

slide-10
SLIDE 10

Muons in the news

  • J. Bernauer, RP

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 4

slide-11
SLIDE 11

Outline

Introduction: How large are the proton, deuteron, helion, alpha...? Atomic vs. nuclear physics Muonic hydrogen: Size does matter! Laser spectroscopy of muonic atoms/ions New measurements: Muonic deuterium → Another puzzle! Muonic helium Regular hydrogen → New Rydberg constant! Future: HFS in muonic hydrogen and helium-3 X-ray spectroscopy of radium etc. Lamb shift in muonic Li, Be, ... 1S-2S in regular tritium (triton radius) ...

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 5

slide-12
SLIDE 12

The Proton

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 6

slide-13
SLIDE 13

The Proton

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 6

slide-14
SLIDE 14

Ernest Rutherford (1871 - 1937)

half-life; α and β rays 1908: Nobel prize Chemistry: "for his investigations into the disintegration of the elements, and the chemistry of radioactive substances"

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 7

slide-15
SLIDE 15

Ernest Rutherford (1871 - 1937)

half-life; α and β rays 1908: Nobel prize Chemistry: "for his investigations into the disintegration of the elements, and the chemistry of radioactive substances" 1911: Most α particles pass a thin gold foil undeflected.

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 7

slide-16
SLIDE 16

Ernest Rutherford (1871 - 1937)

half-life; α and β rays 1908: Nobel prize Chemistry: "for his investigations into the disintegration of the elements, and the chemistry of radioactive substances" 1911: Most α particles pass a thin gold foil undeflected.

⇒ Atom = small, heavy, positive nucleus + electrons.

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 7

slide-17
SLIDE 17

Ernest Rutherford (1871 - 1937)

half-life; α and β rays 1908: Nobel prize Chemistry: "for his investigations into the disintegration of the elements, and the chemistry of radioactive substances" 1911: Most α particles pass a thin gold foil undeflected.

⇒ Atom = small, heavy, positive nucleus + electrons.

1917: Discovery of the proton.

14N + α → 17O + p

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 7

slide-18
SLIDE 18

Ernest Rutherford (1871 - 1937)

half-life; α and β rays 1908: Nobel prize Chemistry: "for his investigations into the disintegration of the elements, and the chemistry of radioactive substances" 1911: Most α particles pass a thin gold foil undeflected.

⇒ Atom = small, heavy, positive nucleus + electrons.

1917: Discovery of the proton.

14N + α → 17O + p

100 years of protons!

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 7

slide-19
SLIDE 19

Robert Hofstadter (1915 - 1990)

1961: Nobel prize Physics (with Rudolf Mössbauer): "for his pioneering studies of electron scattering in atomic nuclei and for his consequent discoveries concerning the

structure of nucleons"

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 8

slide-20
SLIDE 20

Robert Hofstadter (1915 - 1990)

1961: Nobel prize Physics (with Rudolf Mössbauer): "for his pioneering studies of electron scattering in atomic nuclei and for his consequent discoveries concerning the

structure of nucleons"

Hofstadter, McAllister, Phys. Rev. 98, 217 (1955).

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 8

slide-21
SLIDE 21

Robert Hofstadter (1915 - 1990)

1961: Nobel prize Physics (with Rudolf Mössbauer): "for his pioneering studies of electron scattering in atomic nuclei and for his consequent discoveries concerning the

structure of nucleons"

“Proton has a diameter of 0.7×10−13 cm”

Hofstadter, McAllister, Phys. Rev. 98, 217 (1955).

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 8

slide-22
SLIDE 22

Robert Hofstadter (1915 - 1990)

1961: Nobel prize Physics (with Rudolf Mössbauer): "for his pioneering studies of electron scattering in atomic nuclei and for his consequent discoveries concerning the

structure of nucleons"

“The best fit lies near diameter of 0.78×10−13 cm”

Hofstadter, McAllister, Phys. Rev. 98, 217 (1955). Hofstadter, McAllister, Phys. Rev. 102, 851 (1956).

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 8

slide-23
SLIDE 23

Proton radius vs. time

1962 1963 1974 1980 1994 1996 1997 1999 2000 2001 2003 2006 2007 2010 0.780 0.800 0.820 0.840 0.860 0.880 0.900 0.920

Orsay Stanford Saskatoon Mainz Mergell VMD Sick, 2003 Hydrogen CODATA 2006 Bonn VMD year →

Proton radius (fm)

The proton rms charge radius over the last 50 years. e-p scattering: rp = 0.895(18) fm (ur = 2 %) Hydrogen:

rp = 0.8760(78) fm (ur = 0.9 %)

  • electron scattering

slope of GE at Q2 = 0

  • hydrogen spectr.

Lamb shift (S-states)

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 9

slide-24
SLIDE 24

Hydrogen

✻

Energy n=1 n=2 n=3

Bohr E = R∞/n2 V ∼ 1/r

Bohr model of the hydrogen atom

n=1 n=2 n=3 n=4

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 10

slide-25
SLIDE 25

Hydrogen

✻

Energy n=1 n=2 n=3

Bohr E = R∞/n2 V ∼ 1/r Dirac

e− spin relativity

  • 43.5 GHz

Shift:

2P

3/2

2S1/2, 2P

1/2

1S1/2

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 10

slide-26
SLIDE 26

Hydrogen

✻

Energy n=1 n=2 n=3

Bohr E = R∞/n2 V ∼ 1/r Dirac

e− spin relativity

  • 43.5 GHz

Shift:

2P

3/2

2S1/2, 2P

1/2

1S1/2 Lamb

QED 8.2 GHz

2P

1/2

2S1/2

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 10

slide-27
SLIDE 27

Hydrogen

✻

Energy n=1 n=2 n=3

Bohr E = R∞/n2 V ∼ 1/r Dirac

e− spin relativity

  • 43.5 GHz

Shift:

2P

3/2

2S1/2, 2P

1/2

1S1/2 Lamb

QED 8.2 GHz

2P

1/2

2S1/2

1.4 GHz F=1 F=1 F=0 F=0

hfs-splitting

proton-spin

Hhfs ∼ µp · µe

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 10

slide-28
SLIDE 28

Hydrogen

✻

Energy n=1 n=2 n=3

Bohr E = R∞/n2 V ∼ 1/r Dirac

e− spin relativity

  • 43.5 GHz

Shift:

2P

3/2

2S1/2, 2P

1/2

1S1/2 Lamb

QED 8.2 GHz

2P

1/2

2S1/2

1.4 GHz F=1 F=1 F=0 F=0

hfs-splitting

proton-spin

Hhfs ∼ µp · µe rp

proton size

V ≁ 1/r

1.2 MHz 0.15 MHz

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 10

slide-29
SLIDE 29

Atomic physics

Bohr model of the atom

Electrons orbit the nucleus “Planetary system” Hydrogen: 1 electron + 1 proton

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 11

slide-30
SLIDE 30

Atomic physics

Spectrum of atomic hydrogen Bohr model → quantum mechanics

n=1

n=2

1S 2S 2P 3S 3D 4S 8S ...

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 12

slide-31
SLIDE 31

Atomic physics

Bohr model → quantum mechanics planetary orbits → wave function

n=1

n=2

Orbital pictures from Wikipedia

1S 2S 2P 3S 3D 4S 8S ...

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 12

slide-32
SLIDE 32

Atomic and nuclear physics

Wave functions of S and P states:

Orbital pictures from Wikipedia r [Zr/a0]

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

radial w.f.

0.5 1 2S 2P

S states: max. at r=0 Electron sometimes inside the proton. S states are shifted. Shift ist proportional to the size of the proton P states: zero at r=0 Electron is not inside the proton. 1S 2S 2P 3S 3D 4S 8S ...

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 12

slide-33
SLIDE 33

Atomic and nuclear physics

Orbital pictures from Wikipedia

S states: max. at r=0 Electron sometimes inside the proton. S states are shifted. Shift ist proportional to the size of the proton P states: zero at r=0 Electron is not inside the proton.

radius [fm]

0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5

  • arb. units

Coulomb potential: V = 1/r

1S 2S 2P 3S 3D 4S 8S ...

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 12

slide-34
SLIDE 34

Atomic and nuclear physics

Orbital pictures from Wikipedia

S states: max. at r=0 Electron sometimes inside the proton. S states are shifted. Shift ist proportional to the size of the proton P states: zero at r=0 Electron is not inside the proton.

radius [fm]

0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5

  • arb. units

Coulomb potential: V = 1/r proton charge

1S 2S 2P 3S 3D 4S 8S ...

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 12

slide-35
SLIDE 35

Atomic and nuclear physics

Orbital pictures from Wikipedia

S states: max. at r=0 Electron sometimes inside the proton. S states are shifted. Shift ist proportional to the size of the proton P states: zero at r=0 Electron is not inside the proton.

radius [fm]

0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5

  • arb. units

Coulomb potential: V = 1/r proton charge true potential

1S 2S 2P 3S 3D 4S 8S ...

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 12

slide-36
SLIDE 36

Charge radii of light nuclei

Neutron number N Proton Number Z

H D T n

1 2 3

He He He He

3 4 6 8

Be

7

Be

8

Li

6

Li

7

Li

8

Li

9

Li

11

Be

9

Be

10

Be

11

Be

12

0.8775 (51) 2.1424 (21) 1.9730 (160) 1.6810 ( 40) 2.0680 (110) 1.7550 (860) 1.9290 (260) 2.5890 (390)

rms charge radii in fm

  • electron scattering
  • muonic atom spectroscopy

(medium-to-high Z)

  • H/D: precision laser spectroscopy + theory (a lot!)
  • 6He, 8He, ...: laser spectroscopy of isotope shift

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 13

slide-37
SLIDE 37

Muonic hydrogen

Regular hydrogen: electron e− + proton p Muonic hydrogen: muon µ− + proton p

electron

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 14

slide-38
SLIDE 38

Muonic hydrogen

Regular hydrogen: electron e− + proton p Muonic hydrogen: muon µ− + proton p

electron

from Wikipedia

✍

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 14

slide-39
SLIDE 39

Muonic hydrogen

Regular hydrogen: electron e− + proton p Muonic hydrogen: muon µ− + proton p muon mass mµ ≈ 200 ×me Bohr radius rµ ≈ 1/200 ×re

µ inside the proton: 2003 ≈ 107

muon much is more sensitive to rp

electron

muon

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 14

slide-40
SLIDE 40

Proton charge radius and muonic hydrogen

µp(n=2) levels:

2S1/2 2P1/2 2P3/2

F=0 F=0 F=1 F=2 F=1 F=1

23 meV 8.4 meV

3.7 meV

  • fin. size:

206 meV 50 THz 6 µm 225 meV 55 THz 5.5 µm

Lamb shift in µp [meV]:

∆E

= 206.0668(25)−5.2275(10)r2

p

[meV] Proton size effect is 2% of the µ p Lamb shift Measure to 10−5

⇒ rp to 0.05 %

Experiment:

  • R. Pohl et al., Nature 466, 213 (2010).
  • A. Antognini, RP et al., Science 339, 417 (2013).

Theory summary:

  • A. Antognini, RP et al., Ann. Phys. 331, 127 (2013).

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 15

slide-41
SLIDE 41

The laser system

cw TiSa laser Yb:YAG thin−disk laser

9 mJ 9 mJ

Oscillator

200 W 500 W 43 mJ

Wave meter Raman cell

7 mJ

µ Verdi Amplifier

5 W

FP 1030 nm Oscillator Amplifier 1030 nm

200 W 500 W

I / Cs

2

SHG

23 mJ 515 nm 23 mJ 1.5 mJ

µ 6 m cavity cw TiSa 708 nm

400 mW 43 mJ

SHG SHG H O

2

0.25 mJ

6 m 6 m TiSa Amp. TiSa Osc. 708 nm, 15 mJ 20 m

µ µ

− Ge−filter monitoring

Main components:

  • Thin-disk laser

fast response to detected µ−

  • Frequency doubling
  • TiSa laser:

frequency stabilized cw laser injection seeded oscillator multipass amplifier

  • Raman cell

3 Stokes: 708 nm → 6 µm

λ calibration @ 6 µm

  • Target cavity
  • A. Antognini, RP et. al., Opt. Comm. 253, 362 (2005).

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 16

slide-42
SLIDE 42

The laser system

cw TiSa laser Yb:YAG thin−disk laser

9 mJ 9 mJ

Oscillator

200 W 500 W 43 mJ

Wave meter Raman cell

7 mJ

µ Verdi Amplifier

5 W

FP 1030 nm Oscillator Amplifier 1030 nm

200 W 500 W

I / Cs

2

SHG

23 mJ 515 nm 23 mJ 1.5 mJ

µ 6 m cavity cw TiSa 708 nm

400 mW 43 mJ

SHG SHG H O

2

0.25 mJ

6 m 6 m TiSa Amp. TiSa Osc. 708 nm, 15 mJ 20 m

µ µ

− Ge−filter monitoring

Thin-disk laser

  • Large pulse energy: 85 (160) mJ
  • Short trigger-to-pulse delay: 400 ns
  • Random trigger
  • Pulse-to-pulse delays down to 2 ms

(rep. rate 500 Hz)

  • Each single µ− triggers the laser system
  • 2S lifetime ≈ 1 µs → short laser delay
  • A. Antognini, RP et. al.,

IEEE J. Quant. Electr. 45, 993 (2009).

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 16

slide-43
SLIDE 43

The laser system

cw TiSa laser Yb:YAG thin−disk laser

9 mJ 9 mJ

Oscillator

200 W 500 W 43 mJ

Wave meter Raman cell

7 mJ

µ Verdi Amplifier

5 W

FP 1030 nm Oscillator Amplifier 1030 nm

200 W 500 W

I / Cs

2

SHG

23 mJ 515 nm 23 mJ 1.5 mJ

µ 6 m cavity cw TiSa 708 nm

400 mW 43 mJ

SHG SHG H O

2

0.25 mJ

6 m 6 m TiSa Amp. TiSa Osc. 708 nm, 15 mJ 20 m

µ µ

− Ge−filter monitoring

MOPA TiSa laser: cw laser, frequency stabilized

  • referenced to a stable FP cavity
  • FP cavity calibrated with I2, Rb, Cs lines

νFP = N ·FSR FSR = 1497.344(6) MHz νcw

TiSa absolutely known to 30 MHz

Γ2P−2S = 18.6 GHz

Seeded oscillator

→ νpulsed

TiSa

= νcw

TiSa

(frequency chirp ≤ 200 MHz) Multipass amplifier (2f- configuration) gain=10

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 16

slide-44
SLIDE 44

The laser system

cw TiSa laser Yb:YAG thin−disk laser

9 mJ 9 mJ

Oscillator

200 W 500 W 43 mJ

Wave meter Raman cell

7 mJ

µ Verdi Amplifier

5 W

FP 1030 nm Oscillator Amplifier 1030 nm

200 W 500 W

I / Cs

2

SHG

23 mJ 515 nm 23 mJ 1.5 mJ

µ 6 m cavity cw TiSa 708 nm

400 mW 43 mJ

SHG SHG H O

2

0.25 mJ

6 m 6 m TiSa Amp. TiSa Osc. 708 nm, 15 mJ 20 m

µ µ

− Ge−filter monitoring

Raman cell:

µ 6.02 m µ 6.02 m

H2

4155 cm−1 v=0 v=1

H 2

708 nm 2 Stokes 3 Stokes

rd nd

1 Stokes

st

µ 1.00 m 1.72 m µ 708 nm

ν6µm = ν708nm −3· ¯ hωvib ωvib(p,T) = const

tunable

P . Rabinowitz et. al., IEEE J. QE 22, 797 (1986)

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 16

slide-45
SLIDE 45

The laser system

cw TiSa laser Yb:YAG thin−disk laser

9 mJ 9 mJ

Oscillator

200 W 500 W 43 mJ

Wave meter Raman cell

7 mJ

µ Verdi Amplifier

5 W

FP 1030 nm Oscillator Amplifier 1030 nm

200 W 500 W

I / Cs

2

SHG

23 mJ 515 nm 23 mJ 1.5 mJ

µ 6 m cavity cw TiSa 708 nm

400 mW 43 mJ

SHG SHG H O

2

0.25 mJ

6 m 6 m TiSa Amp. TiSa Osc. 708 nm, 15 mJ 20 m

µ µ

− Ge−filter monitoring

α 190 mm 2 mm 25 µ 3 mm 12

  • Horiz. plane
  • Vert. plane

− Laser pulse β

Design: insensitive to misalignment Transverse illumination Large volume Dielectric coating with R ≥ 99.9% (at 6 µm )

→ Light makes 1000 reflections → Light is confined for τ=50 ns → 0.15 mJ saturates the 2S−2P transition

  • J. Vogelsang, RP et. al., Opt. Expr. 22, 13050 (2014)

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 16

slide-46
SLIDE 46

The laser system

cw TiSa laser Yb:YAG thin−disk laser

9 mJ 9 mJ

Oscillator

200 W 500 W 43 mJ

Wave meter Raman cell

7 mJ

µ Verdi Amplifier

5 W

FP 1030 nm Oscillator Amplifier 1030 nm

200 W 500 W

I / Cs

2

SHG

23 mJ 515 nm 23 mJ 1.5 mJ

µ 6 m cavity cw TiSa 708 nm

400 mW 43 mJ

SHG SHG H O

2

0.25 mJ

6 m 6 m TiSa Amp. TiSa Osc. 708 nm, 15 mJ 20 m

µ µ

− Ge−filter monitoring

0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000 2100

wavenumber (cm-1)

0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 1630 1640 1650 1660 1670 1680 1690 1700

scan region wavenumber (cm-1)

Water absorption

  • Vacuum tube for 6 µm beam transport.
  • Direct frequency calibration at 6 µm.

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 16

slide-47
SLIDE 47

Disk amplifier laser heads

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 17

slide-48
SLIDE 48

Disk laser doubling stages

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 18

slide-49
SLIDE 49

TiSa lasers and Raman cell

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 19

slide-50
SLIDE 50

Laser beam tube

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 20

slide-51
SLIDE 51

Swiss muons

❘

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 21

slide-52
SLIDE 52

Swiss muons

❘

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 21

slide-53
SLIDE 53

Swiss muons

q

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 21

slide-54
SLIDE 54

Setup

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 22

slide-55
SLIDE 55

Setup

Play movie: “Muon beam”

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 22

slide-56
SLIDE 56

µp Lamb shift experiment: Principle

time spectrum of 2 keV x-rays

time [us] 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 events in 25 ns 1 10

2

10

3

10

4

10

(∼ 13 hours of data @ 1 laser wavelength)

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 23

slide-57
SLIDE 57

µp Lamb shift experiment: Principle

time spectrum of 2 keV x-rays

time [us] 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 events in 25 ns 1 10

2

10

3

10

4

10

1 S 2 S 2 P 2 keV 99 % n~14

1 %

“prompt” (t ∼ 0)

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 23

slide-58
SLIDE 58

µp Lamb shift experiment: Principle

time spectrum of 2 keV x-rays

time [us] 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 events in 25 ns 1 10

2

10

3

10

4

10

1 S 2 S 2 P 2 keV 99 % n~14

1 %

“prompt” (t ∼ 0)

2 P 1 S 2 S 2 keV Laser

“delayed” (t ∼1 µs) 6 e v e n t s p e r h

  • u

r

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 23

slide-59
SLIDE 59

µp Lamb shift experiment: Principle

time spectrum of 2 keV x-rays

time [us] 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 events in 25 ns 1 10

2

10

3

10

4

10

1 S 2 S 2 P 2 keV 99 % n~14

1 %

“prompt” (t ∼ 0)

2 P 1 S 2 S 2 keV Laser

“delayed” (t ∼1 µs)

laser frequency [THz]

49.75 49.8 49.85 49.9 49.95

delayed / prompt events [1e−4]

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

normalize delayed Kα

prompt Kα ⇒ Resonance

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 23

slide-60
SLIDE 60

Muon beam line

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 24

slide-61
SLIDE 61

Target, cavity and detectors

Muons Laser pulse

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 25

slide-62
SLIDE 62

Target, cavity and detectors

Muons Laser pulse

Play movie: “The Search”

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 25

slide-63
SLIDE 63

Yeah!

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 26

slide-64
SLIDE 64

The resonance: discrepancy, sys., stat.

laser frequency [THz] 49.75 49.8 49.85 49.9 49.95 ]

  • 4

delayed / prompt events [10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

e-p scattering CODATA-06

  • ur value

O

2

H calib. Water-line/laser wavelength: 300 MHz uncertainty

∆ν water-line to resonance:

200 kHz uncertainty Statistics: 700 MHz Systematics: 300 MHz Discrepancy:

5.0σ ↔ 80 GHz ↔ δν/ν = 1.5×10−3

  • R. Pohl et al., Nature 466, 213 (2010).
  • A. Antognini, RP et al.,Science 339, 417 (2013).

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 27

slide-65
SLIDE 65

Muonic hydrogen results

Lamb shift 2S1/2 2P1/2 2P3/2

F=0 F=1 F=0 F=1 F=2 F=1

2S hyperfine splitting 2P fine structure

νtriplet νsinglet

Exp.:

  • R. Pohl et al., Nature 466, 213 (2010).
  • A. Antognini, RP et al., Science 339, 417 (2013).

Theo: A. Antognini, RP et al., Ann. Phys. 331, 127 (2013).

  • 49.0 THz (GHz)

ν

750 800 850 900 950 2 4 6 8

CODATA this value

signal [arb. units]

νt = ν(2SF=1

1/2 −2PF=2 3/2 )

  • 54.0 THz (GHz)

ν

450 500 550 600 650 2 4 6 8

CODATA this value

signal [arb. units]

νs = ν(2SF=0

1/2 −2PF=1 3/2 )

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 28

slide-66
SLIDE 66

Muonic hydrogen results

Lamb shift 2S1/2 2P1/2 2P3/2

F=0 F=1 F=0 F=1 F=2 F=1

2S hyperfine splitting 2P fine structure

νtriplet νsinglet

Exp.:

  • R. Pohl et al., Nature 466, 213 (2010).
  • A. Antognini, RP et al., Science 339, 417 (2013).

Theo: A. Antognini, RP et al., Ann. Phys. 331, 127 (2013).

  • two transitions measured

νt = 49881.35(

65) GHz

νs = 54611.16(1.05) GHz

  • Lamb shift ⇒ charge radius

∆ELS = 206.0668(25)−5.2275(10) r2

E

[meV, fm]

r2

E =

d3r r2 ρE(r)

rE = 0.84087(26)exp (29)th fm = 0.84087 (39) fm

10x more precise than CODATA-2010 4% smaller (7σ) proton radius puzzle

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 28

slide-67
SLIDE 67

Muonic hydrogen results

Lamb shift 2S1/2 2P1/2 2P3/2

F=0 F=1 F=0 F=1 F=2 F=1

2S hyperfine splitting 2P fine structure

νtriplet νsinglet

Exp.:

  • R. Pohl et al., Nature 466, 213 (2010).
  • A. Antognini, RP et al., Science 339, 417 (2013).

Theo: A. Antognini, RP et al., Ann. Phys. 331, 127 (2013).

  • two transitions measured

νt = 49881.35(

65) GHz

νs = 54611.16(1.05) GHz

  • Lamb shift ⇒ charge radius

∆ELS = 206.0668(25)−5.2275(10) r2

E

[meV, fm]

r2

E =

d3r r2 ρE(r)

rE = 0.84087(26)exp (29)th fm = 0.84087 (39) fm

  • 2S-HFS ⇒ Zemach radius

∆EHFS = 22.9843(30)−0.1621(10)rZ [meV, fm] rZ =

d3r d3r′ r ρE(r)ρM(r −r′)

rZ = 1.082 (31)exp (20)th fm = 1.082 (37) fm

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 28

slide-68
SLIDE 68

Proton Zemach radius

2S hyperfine splitting in µp is:

∆EHFS = 22.9843(30)−0.1621(10)rZ [fm] meV

with rZ =

d3r d3r′ r ρE(r)ρM(r −r′)

We measured

∆EHFS = 22.8089(51) meV

This gives a proton Zemach radius rZ = 1.082 (31)exp (20)th = 1.082 (37) fm

[fm]

Z

Proton Zemach radius R

1 1.02 1.04 1.06 1.08 1.1 1.12

H, Dupays e-p, Friar H, Volotka e-p, Mainz p 2013 µ

  • A. Antognini, RP et al., Science 339, 417 (2013)

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 29

slide-69
SLIDE 69

Proton Zemach radius

2S hyperfine splitting in µp is:

∆EHFS = 22.9843(30)−0.1621(10)rZ [fm] meV

with rZ =

d3r d3r′ r ρE(r)ρM(r −r′)

We measured

∆EHFS = 22.8089(51) meV

This gives a proton Zemach radius rZ = 1.082 (31)exp (20)th = 1.082 (37) fm

[fm]

Z

Proton Zemach radius R

1 1.02 1.04 1.06 1.08 1.1 1.12

H, Dupays e-p, Friar H, Volotka e-p, Mainz p 2013 µ goal R-16-02 (CREMA-3)

C R E M A

  • 3

a p p r

  • v

e d a t P S I

  • A. Antognini, RP et al., Science 339, 417 (2013)

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 29

slide-70
SLIDE 70

Muonic deuterium

2S1/2 2P1/2 2P3/2

F=1/2 F=3/2 F=1/2 F=3/2 F=5/2 F=1/2 F=3/2

FS: 8.86412 meV LS: 202.88 meV 2S-HFS: 6.27 meV 0.7534 meV 0.3634 meV

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 30

slide-71
SLIDE 71

Muonic DEUTERIUM

(GHz) ν ∆

100

  • 100

5 10

CODATA this value p + iso µ

F=5/2 3/2

2P

  • F=3/2

1/2

2S

signal [arb. units] (GHz) ν ∆

100

  • 100

2 4 6 8

CODATA this value p + iso µ

F=3/2 3/2

2P

  • F=1/2

1/2

2S

F=1/2 3/2

2P

  • F=1/2

1/2

2S

signal [arb. units]

2S1/2 2P1/2 2P3/2

F=1/2 F=3/2 F=1/2 F=3/2 F=5/2 F=1/2 F=3/2

Experiment:

RP et al. (CREMA), Science 353, 417 (2016).

∆Eexp

LS = 202.8785(31)stat(14)syst meV

⇒ rd = 2.12562(13)exp(77)theo fm

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 31

slide-72
SLIDE 72

Muonic DEUTERIUM

(GHz) ν ∆

100

  • 100

5 10

CODATA this value p + iso µ

F=5/2 3/2

2P

  • F=3/2

1/2

2S

signal [arb. units] (GHz) ν ∆

100

  • 100

2 4 6 8

CODATA this value p + iso µ

F=3/2 3/2

2P

  • F=1/2

1/2

2S

F=1/2 3/2

2P

  • F=1/2

1/2

2S

signal [arb. units]

Experiment:

RP et al. (CREMA), Science 353, 417 (2016).

∆Eexp

LS = 202.8785(31)stat(14)syst meV

⇒ rd = 2.12562(13)exp(77)theo fm

Theory:

∆Etheo

LS = 228.7766( 10)meV (QED)

+1.7096(200)meV (TPE) −6.1103( 3)r2

d meV/fm2, Krauth, RP et al., Ann. Phys. 366, 168 (2016) [arXiv 1506.01298] based on papers and communication from Bacca, Barnea, Birse, Borie, Carlson, Eides, Faustov, Friar, Gorchtein, Hernandez, Ivanov, Jentschura, Ji, Karshenboim, Korzinin, Krutov, Martynenko, McGovern, Nevo Dinur, Pachucki, Shelyuto, Sick, Vanderhaeghen et al.

THANK YOU!

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 31

slide-73
SLIDE 73

Deuteron charge radius

H/D isotope shift: r2

d −r2 p = 3.82007(65) fm2

C.G. Parthey, RP et al., PRL 104, 233001 (2010)

CODATA 2010

rd = 2.14240(210) fm rpfrom µH gives rd = 2.12771( 22) fm ← 7σ from rp

Deuteron charge radius [fm]

2.11 2.115 2.12 2.125 2.13 2.135 2.14 2.145

CODATA-2010 e-d scatt. H + iso H/D(1S-2S) µ

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 32

slide-74
SLIDE 74

Deuteron charge radius

H/D isotope shift: r2

d −r2 p = 3.82007(65) fm2

C.G. Parthey, RP et al., PRL 104, 233001 (2010)

CODATA 2010

rd = 2.14240(210) fm rpfrom µH gives rd = 2.12771( 22) fm ← 7σ from rp

Deuteron charge radius [fm]

2.11 2.115 2.12 2.125 2.13 2.135 2.14 2.145

CODATA-2010 e-d scatt. H + iso H/D(1S-2S) µ

✲ ✛

(7σ from µH)

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 32

slide-75
SLIDE 75

Deuteron charge radius

H/D isotope shift: r2

d −r2 p = 3.82007(65) fm2

C.G. Parthey, RP et al., PRL 104, 233001 (2010)

CODATA 2010

rd = 2.14240(210) fm rpfrom µH gives rd = 2.12771( 22) fm ← 7σ from rp

Muonic DEUTERIUM

rd = 2.12562( 13)exp (77)theo fm RP et al., Science 353, 417 (2016)

Deuteron charge radius [fm]

2.11 2.115 2.12 2.125 2.13 2.135 2.14 2.145

CODATA-2010 e-d scatt. H + iso H/D(1S-2S) µ D µ

✲ ✛

(7σ from µH)

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 32

slide-76
SLIDE 76

Deuteron charge radius

H/D isotope shift: r2

d −r2 p = 3.82007(65) fm2

C.G. Parthey, RP et al., PRL 104, 233001 (2010)

CODATA 2010

rd = 2.14240(210) fm rpfrom µH gives rd = 2.12771( 22) fm ← 7σ from rp

Muonic DEUTERIUM

rd = 2.12562( 13)exp (77)theo fm RP et al., Science 353, 417 (2016)

Deuteron charge radius [fm]

2.11 2.115 2.12 2.125 2.13 2.135 2.14 2.145

CODATA-2010 e-d scatt. H + iso H/D(1S-2S) µ D µ

✲ ✛

(7σ from µH)

✲ ✛ another 7σ discrepancy!

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 32

slide-77
SLIDE 77

Deuteron charge radius

H/D isotope shift: r2

d −r2 p = 3.82007(65) fm2

C.G. Parthey, RP et al., PRL 104, 233001 (2010)

CODATA 2010

rd = 2.14240(210) fm rpfrom µH gives rd = 2.12771( 22) fm ← 7σ from rp

Muonic DEUTERIUM

rd = 2.12562( 13)exp (77)theo fm RP et al., Science 353, 417 (2016)

electronic D (rp indep.)

rd = 2.14150(450) fm

RP et al. arXiv 1607.03165

Deuteron charge radius [fm]

2.11 2.115 2.12 2.125 2.13 2.135 2.14 2.145

CODATA-2010 e-d scatt. H + iso H/D(1S-2S) µ D µ D spectr.

✲ ✛

(7σ from µH)

✲ ✛ another 7σ discrepancy!

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 32

slide-78
SLIDE 78

Deuteron charge radius

H/D isotope shift: r2

d −r2 p = 3.82007(65) fm2

C.G. Parthey, RP et al., PRL 104, 233001 (2010)

CODATA 2010

rd = 2.14240(210) fm rpfrom µH gives rd = 2.12771( 22) fm ← 7σ from rp

Muonic DEUTERIUM

rd = 2.12562( 13)exp (77)theo fm RP et al., Science 353, 417 (2016)

electronic D (rp indep.)

rd = 2.14150(450) fm

RP et al. arXiv 1607.03165

← 3.5σ

Deuteron charge radius [fm]

2.11 2.115 2.12 2.125 2.13 2.135 2.14 2.145

CODATA-2010 e-d scatt. H + iso H/D(1S-2S) µ D µ D spectr.

✲ ✛

(7σ from µH)

✲ ✛ another 7σ discrepancy! ✲ ✛ 3.5σ indep. of rp

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 32

slide-79
SLIDE 79

Results from muonic deuterium (prel.)

Lamb shift in muonic deuterium:

∆Etheo

LS = 228.7766(10)meV+∆ETPE −6.1103(3) r2 d meV/fm2

with deuteron polarizability (TPE) ∆ETPE(theo) = 1.7096(200)meV

J.J. Krauth et al., Ann. Phys. 366, 168 (2016) [1506.01298] compilation of original results from: Borie, Martynenko et al., Karshenboim et al., Jentschura, Bacca, Barnea, Nevo Dinur et al., Pachucki et al., Friar, Carlson, Gorchtein, Vanderhaeghen, and others

rd(µd) = 2.12562(13)exp (77)theo fm

(preliminary)

rd(µp+iso) = 2.12771(22) fm

from rp(µp) and H/D(1S-2S)

2.6σ rd(CODATA) = 2.14240(210) fm 7.5σ

Disprepancy to ∆ELS(rd(CODATA)) = 0.438(59) meV (“proton radius puzzle” (µp discrepancy) = 0.329(47) meV)

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 33

slide-80
SLIDE 80

Theory in µd: TPE

rd = 2.12562(13)exp(77)theo fm,

using ∆Etheo

TPE = 1.7096(200)meV

limited by deuteron structure (TPE) contributions to the µd LS

µ d µ d µ d µ d

Cancellation between elastic “Friar” (a.k.a. 3rd Zemach) terms and part of inelastic “polarizability” contributions. Nucleon structure adds relevant contributions (and uncertainty).

Friar & Payne, PRA 56, 5173 (1997) ; Pachucki, PRL 106, 193007 (2011) ; Friar, PRC 88, 034003 (2013) ; Hernandez et al., PLB 736, 344 (2014) ; Pachucki & Wienczek, PRA 91, 040503(R) (2015) ; Carlson, Gorchtein, Vanderhaeghen, PRA 89, 022504 (2014) ; Birse & McGovern et al. J.J. Krauth, RP et al., Ann. Phys. 366, 168 (2016) [1506.01298]

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 34

slide-81
SLIDE 81

Theory in µd: TPE

Table 3: Deuteron structure contributions to the Lamb shift in muonic deuterium. Values are in meV.

Item Contribution Pachucki [55] Friar [60] Hernandez et al. [58] Pach.& Wienczek [65] Carlson et al. [64] Our choice AV18 ZRA AV18 N3LO † AV18 data value source Source 1 2 3 4 5 6 p1 Dipole 1.910 δ0E 1.925 Leading C1 1.907 1.926 δ(0)

D1

1.910 δ0E 1.9165 ± 0.0095 3-5 p2

  • Rel. corr. to p1, longitudinal part

−0.035 δRE −0.037 Subleading C1 −0.029 −0.030 δ(0)

L

−0.026 δRE p3

  • Rel. corr. to p1, transverse part

0.012 0.013 δ(0)

T

p4

  • Rel. corr. to p1, higher order

0.004 δHOE sum Total rel. corr., p2+p3+p4 −0.035 −0.037 −0.017 −0.017 −0.022 −0.0195 ± 0.0025 3-5 p5 Coulomb distortion, leading −0.255 δC1E −0.255 δC1E p6

  • Coul. distortion, next order

−0.006 δC2E −0.006 δC2E sum Total Coulomb distortion, p5+p6 −0.261 −0.262 −0.264 δ(0)

C

−0.261 −0.2625 ± 0.0015 3-5 p7

  • El. monopole excitation

−0.045 δQ0E −0.042 C0 −0.042 −0.041 δ(2)

R2

−0.042 δQ0E p8

  • El. dipole excitation

0.151 δQ1E 0.137 Retarded C1 0.139 0.140 δ(2)

D1D3

0.139 δQ1E p9

  • El. quadrupole excitation

−0.066 δQ2E −0.061 C2 −0.061 −0.061 δ(2)

Q

−0.061 δQ2E sum

  • Tot. nuclear excitation, p7+p8+p9

0.040 0.034 C0 + ret-C1 + C2 0.036 0.038 0.036 0.0360 ± 0.0020 2-5 p10 Magnetic −0.008 ♦ δME −0.011 M1 −0.008 −0.007 δ(0)

M

−0.008 δME −0.0090 ± 0.0020 2-5 SUM 1 Total nuclear (corrected) 1.646 1.648 1.656 1.676 1.655 1.6615 ± 0.0103 p11 Finite nucleon size 0.021 Retarded C1 f.s. 0.020 ♦ 0.021 ♦?? δ(2)

NS

0.020 δF SE p12 n p charge correlation −0.023 pn correl. f.s. −0.017 −0.017 δ(1)

np

−0.018 δF ZE sum p11+p12 −0.002 0.003 0.004 0.002 0.0010 ± 0.0030 2-5 p13 Proton elastic 3rd Zemach moment

  • 0.043(3) δP E

0.030 r3pp

(2)

  • 0.043(3) δP E

0.0289 ± 0.0015 Eq.(13) p14 Proton inelastic polarizab.

  • 0.027(2)

δN

pol [64]

  • 0.028(2)∆Ehadr
  • 0.0280 ± 0.0020

6 p15 Neutron inelastic polarizab. 0.016(8) δNE p16 Proton & neutron subtraction term −0.0098 ± 0.0098 Eq.(15) sum Nucleon TPE, p13+p14+p15+p16 0.043(3) 0.030 0.027(2) 0.059(9) 0.0471 ± 0.0101 SUM 2 Total nucleon contrib. 0.043(3) 0.028 0.030(2) 0.061(9) 0.0476 ± 0.0105 Sum, published 1.680(16) 1.941(19) 1.690(20) 1.717(20) 2.011(740) Sum, corrected 1.697(19) 1.714(20) 1.707(20) 1.748(740) 1.7096 ± 0.0147

J.J. Krauth et al., Ann. Phys. 366, 168 (2016) [1506.01298]

∆ETPE(theo) = 1.7096±0.0200 meV ∆ETPE(exp) = 1.7638±0.0068 meV

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 35

slide-82
SLIDE 82

Experimental TPE in µd

Deuteron charge radius [fm]

2.11 2.115 2.12 2.125 2.13 2.135 2.14 2.145

CODATA-2010 e-d scatt. H + iso H/D(1S-2S) µ D µ D spectr.

∆ETPE(theo) = 1.7096±0.0200 meV ∆ETPE(exp) = 1.7638±0.0068 meV 2.6σ,

3x more accurate

∆ELS = 228.7766(10)meV (QED)+∆ETPE −6.1103(3) r2

d meV/fm2,

  • ∆Eexp

LS = 202.8785(31)stat(14)syst meV from µD exp.

  • rd = 2.12771(22) fm

from r2

d −r2 p = 3.82007(65) fm2 [H/D(1S-2S) isotope shift]

using

rp(µH) = 0.84087(39) fm

✲ ✛ 2.6σ from TPE

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 36

slide-83
SLIDE 83

Experimental TPE in µd

Deuteron charge radius [fm]

2.11 2.115 2.12 2.125 2.13 2.135 2.14 2.145

CODATA-2010 e-d scatt. H + iso H/D(1S-2S) µ D µ D spectr.

∆ETPE(theo) = 1.7096±0.0200 meV ∆ETPE(exp) = 1.7638±0.0068 meV 2.6σ,

3x more accurate

∆ELS = 228.7766(10)meV (QED)+∆ETPE −6.1103(3) r2

d meV/fm2,

  • ∆Eexp

LS = 202.8785(31)stat(14)syst meV from µD exp.

  • rd = 2.12771(22) fm

from r2

d −r2 p = 3.82007(65) fm2 [H/D(1S-2S) isotope shift]

using

rp(µH) = 0.84087(39) fm

✲ ✛ 2.6σ from TPE

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 36

slide-84
SLIDE 84

Conclusions µp and µd

Proton charge radius: rp= 0.84087 (39) fm Proton Zemach radius: RZ = 1.082 (37) fm Rydberg constant, using H(1S-2S):

R∞ = 3.2898419602495 (10)radius (25)QED ×1015 Hz/c

Deuteron charge radius: rd= 2.12771 (22) fm using H/D(1S-2S)

rp is ∼ 7σ smaller than CODATA-2010 4.0σ smaller than rp(H spectrosopy) rd is 7.5σ smaller than CODATA-2010 (99% correlated with rp!) 3.5σ smaller than rd(D spectrosopy)

Proton and deuteron are consistently too small:

r2

d = r2 struct + r2 p + r2 n +

3¯ h2 4m2

pc2

Pohl et al., Nature 466, 213 (2010). Antognini et al., Science 339, 417 (2013). Pohl et al., Science 353, 669 (2016). Antognini et al., Ann. Phys. 331, 127 (2013). Krauth et al., Ann. Phys. 366, 168 (2016). Pohl et al., Metrologia (accepted 2016).

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 37

slide-85
SLIDE 85

Conclusions µp and µd

Proton charge radius: rp= 0.84087 (39) fm Proton Zemach radius: RZ = 1.082 (37) fm Rydberg constant, using H(1S-2S):

R∞ = 3.2898419602495 (10)radius (25)QED ×1015 Hz/c

Deuteron charge radius: rd= 2.12771 (22) fm using H/D(1S-2S)

rp is ∼ 7σ smaller than CODATA-2010 4.0σ smaller than rp(H spectrosopy) rd is 7.5σ smaller than CODATA-2010 (99% correlated with rp!) 3.5σ smaller than rd(D spectrosopy)

Proton and deuteron are consistently too small:

r2

d = r2 struct + r2 p + r2 n +

3¯ h2 4m2

pc2

Pohl et al., Nature 466, 213 (2010). Antognini et al., Science 339, 417 (2013). Pohl et al., Science 353, 669 (2016). Antognini et al., Ann. Phys. 331, 127 (2013). Krauth et al., Ann. Phys. 366, 168 (2016). Pohl et al., Metrologia (accepted 2016).

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 37

slide-86
SLIDE 86

Muonic helium ions

F=1 F=2 F=0 F=1 F=0 F=1

2P3/2 2P1/2 2P 2P3/2 2P1/2 2P 2S1/2 2S1/2 µ4He+ µ3He+

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 38

slide-87
SLIDE 87

Lamb shift in muonic helium

Goal: Measure ∆E(2S-2P) in µ 4He, µ 3He to ∼ 50 ppm

⇒ alpha particle and helion charge radius to 3×10−4

(± 0.0005 fm), This is 10 times better than from electron scattering. Solve discrepancy in 3He - 4He isotope shift.

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 39

slide-88
SLIDE 88

Lamb shift in muonic helium

Goal: Measure ∆E(2S-2P) in µ 4He, µ 3He to ∼ 50 ppm

⇒ alpha particle and helion charge radius to 3×10−4

(± 0.0005 fm), This is 10 times better than from electron scattering. Solve discrepancy in 3He - 4He isotope shift.

2S1/2 2P1/2 2P3/2

F=0 F=0 F=1 F=2 F=1 F=1

23 meV 8.4 meV

3.7 meV

  • fin. size:

206 meV 50 THz 6 µm 225 meV 55 THz 5.5 µm 2S1/2 2P 2P1/2 2P3/2 146 meV

  • fin. size effect

290 meV 812 nm 898 nm

2S1/2 2P1/2 2P3/2 2P

F=0 F=1 F=0 F=1 F=2 F=1

167 meV 145 meV

  • fin. size effect

397 meV

µp µ 4He µ 3He

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 39

slide-89
SLIDE 89

1st resonance in muonic He-4

µ4He(2S1/2 → 2P3/2)

at ∼ 813 nm wavelength

Frequency [THz]

  • 3
  • 2
  • 1

1 2 3 4 Events / Prompt 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2

  • 3

10

  • Preliminary

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 40

slide-90
SLIDE 90

1st resonance in muonic He-4

µ4He(2S1/2 → 2P3/2)

at ∼ 813 nm wavelength

Frequency [THz]

  • 3
  • 2
  • 1

1 2 3 4 Events / Prompt 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2

  • 3

10

  • e−He scattering

Preliminary

Sick, PRD 77, 040302(R) (2008) Borie, Ann. Phys. 327, 733 (2012)

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 40

slide-91
SLIDE 91

1st resonance in muonic He-4

µ4He(2S1/2 → 2P3/2)

at ∼ 813 nm wavelength

Frequency [THz]

  • 3
  • 2
  • 1

1 2 3 4 Events / Prompt 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2

  • 3

10

  • Zavattini

Preliminary

Carboni et al, Nucl. Phys. A273, 381 (1977)

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 40

slide-92
SLIDE 92

1st resonance in muonic He-4

µ4He(2S1/2 → 2P3/2)

at ∼ 813 nm wavelength

Frequency [THz]

  • 3
  • 2
  • 1

1 2 3 4 Events / Prompt 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2

  • 3

10

  • Batell, McKeen, Pospelov

Preliminary

Batell, McKeen, Pospelov, PRL 107, 011803 (2011)

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 40

slide-93
SLIDE 93

Muonic summary

Muonic hydrogen gives: Proton charge radius: rp= 0.84087 (39) fm

7σ away from electronic average (CODATA: H, e-p scatt.)

Deuteron charge radius: rd = 2.12771(22) fm from µH + H/D(1S-2S) Muonic deuterium: Deuteron charge radius: rd = 2.12562(13)exp (77)theo fm

consistent with muonic proton radius, but

again 7σ away from CODATA: 2.14240(210) fm “Proton” Radius Puzzle is in fact “Z=1 Radius Puzzle” muonic helium-3 and -4 ions: No big discrepancy (PRELIMINARY)

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 41

slide-94
SLIDE 94

Muonic summary

Muonic hydrogen gives: Proton charge radius: rp= 0.84087 (39) fm

7σ away from electronic average (CODATA: H, e-p scatt.)

Deuteron charge radius: rd = 2.12771(22) fm from µH + H/D(1S-2S) Muonic deuterium: Deuteron charge radius: rd = 2.12562(13)exp (77)theo fm

consistent with muonic proton radius, but

again 7σ away from CODATA: 2.14240(210) fm “Proton” Radius Puzzle is in fact “Z=1 Radius Puzzle” muonic helium-3 and -4 ions: No big discrepancy (PRELIMINARY) Could ALL be solved if the Rydberg constant [ and hence the (electronic) proton radius ] was wrong. Plus ∼ 2.6σ change in deuteron polarizabililty. Plus: accept dispersion fits of e-p scattering Or: BSM physics, e.g. Tucker-Smith & Yavin (2011)

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 41

slide-95
SLIDE 95

(Electronic) hydrogen.

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 42

slide-96
SLIDE 96

Rydberg constant

year 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 fractional uncertainty

12 −

10

11 −

10

10 −

10

9 −

10

8 −

10

7 −

10

6 −

10

single measurements least-square adjustments

R∞ = α2 me c 2h

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 43

slide-97
SLIDE 97

Hydrogen spectroscopy

Hydrogen : EnS ≃ −R∞ n2 + L1S n3 Lamb shift : L1S(rp) = 8171.636(4)+1.5645r2

p MHz

RP et al. arXiv 1607.03165

1S 2S 2P 3S 3D 4S 8S

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 44

slide-98
SLIDE 98

Rydberg constant

year 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 fractional uncertainty

12 −

10

11 −

10

10 −

10

9 −

10

8 −

10

7 −

10

6 −

10

single measurements least-square adjustments

Hydrogen spectroscopy (Lamb shift):

L1S(rp) = 8171.636(4)+1.5645r2

p

MHz

1S 2S 2P 3S 3D 4S 8S 1S-2S

EnS ≃ −R∞ n2 + L1S n3

2 unknowns ⇒

  • use rp from muonic H

to calculate Lamb shift L1S

  • combine with H(1S-2S)

⇒ Rydberg constant R∞

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 45

slide-99
SLIDE 99

Rydberg constant

year 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 fractional uncertainty

12 −

10

11 −

10

10 −

10

9 −

10

8 −

10

7 −

10

6 −

10 discrepancy

single measurements least-square adjustments muonic hydrogen + H(1S-2S)

R∞= 3.289 841 960 249 5 (10)rp (25)QED ×1015 Hz/c

[8 parts in 1013]

H(1S-2S): C.G. Parthey, RP et al., PRL 107, 203001 (2011).

rp: A. Antognini, RP et al., Science 339, 417 (2013). Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 45

slide-100
SLIDE 100

Hydrogen spectroscopy

Lamb shift : L1S(rp) = 8171.636(4)+1.5645r2

p MHz

LnS ≃ L1S n3

RP et al. arXiv 1607.03165

1S 2S 2P 3S 3D 4S 8S

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 46

slide-101
SLIDE 101

Hydrogen spectroscopy

Lamb shift : L1S(rp) = 8171.636(4)+1.5645r2

p MHz

LnS ≃ L1S n3

RP et al. arXiv 1607.03165

1S 2S 2P 3S 3D 4S 8S 2S-2P

classical Lamb shift: 2S-2P

Lamb, Retherford 1946 Lundeen, Pipkin 1986 Hagley, Pipkin 1994 Hessels et al., 201x

2S1/2 2P1/2 2P3/2

F=0 F=0 F=1 F=1 F=1 F=2

1058 MHz = 4 µeV 9910 MHz = 40 µeV

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 46

slide-102
SLIDE 102

Hydrogen spectroscopy

Lamb shift : L1S(rp) = 8171.636(4)+1.5645r2

p MHz

LnS ≃ L1S n3

RP et al. arXiv 1607.03165

1S 2S 2P 3S 3D 4S 8S 1S-2S 2S-4P 2S-8D

EnS ≃ −R∞ n2 + L1S n3

2 unknowns ⇒ 2 transitions

  • Rydberg constant R∞
  • Lamb shift L1S ⇒ rp

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 46

slide-103
SLIDE 103

Hydrogen spectroscopy

2S1/2 - 2P1/2 2S1/2 - 2P1/2 2S1/2 - 2P3/2 1S-2S + 2S- 4S1/2 1S-2S + 2S- 4D5/2 1S-2S + 2S- 4P1/2 1S-2S + 2S- 4P3/2 1S-2S + 2S- 6S1/2 1S-2S + 2S- 6D5/2 1S-2S + 2S- 8S1/2 1S-2S + 2S- 8D3/2 1S-2S + 2S- 8D5/2 1S-2S + 2S-12D3/2 1S-2S + 2S-12D5/2 1S-2S + 1S - 3S1/2

proton charge radius (fm)

0.8 0.85 0.9 0.95 1

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 47

slide-104
SLIDE 104

Hydrogen spectroscopy

0.8 0.85 0.9 0.95 1

2S1/2 - 2P1/2 2S1/2 - 2P1/2 2S1/2 - 2P3/2 1S-2S + 2S- 4S1/2 1S-2S + 2S- 4D5/2 1S-2S + 2S- 4P1/2 1S-2S + 2S- 4P3/2 1S-2S + 2S- 6S1/2 1S-2S + 2S- 6D5/2 1S-2S + 2S- 8S1/2 1S-2S + 2S- 8D3/2 1S-2S + 2S- 8D5/2 1S-2S + 2S-12D3/2 1S-2S + 2S-12D5/2 1S-2S + 1S - 3S1/2 µp : 0.84087 +- 0.00039 fm

proton charge radius (fm)

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 47

slide-105
SLIDE 105

Hydrogen spectroscopy

0.8 0.85 0.9 0.95 1

2S1/2 - 2P1/2 2S1/2 - 2P1/2 2S1/2 - 2P3/2 1S-2S + 2S- 4S1/2 1S-2S + 2S- 4D5/2 1S-2S + 2S- 4P1/2 1S-2S + 2S- 4P3/2 1S-2S + 2S- 6S1/2 1S-2S + 2S- 6D5/2 1S-2S + 2S- 8S1/2 1S-2S + 2S- 8D3/2 1S-2S + 2S- 8D5/2 1S-2S + 2S-12D3/2 1S-2S + 2S-12D5/2 1S-2S + 1S - 3S1/2 Havg = 0.8779 +- 0.0094 fm µp : 0.84087 +- 0.00039 fm

proton charge radius (fm)

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 47

slide-106
SLIDE 106

Hydrogen spectroscopy

0.8 0.85 0.9 0.95 1

2S1/2 - 2P1/2 2S1/2 - 2P1/2 2S1/2 - 2P3/2 1S-2S + 2S- 4S1/2 1S-2S + 2S- 4D5/2 1S-2S + 2S- 4P1/2 1S-2S + 2S- 4P3/2 1S-2S + 2S- 6S1/2 1S-2S + 2S- 6D5/2 1S-2S + 2S- 8S1/2 1S-2S + 2S- 8D3/2 1S-2S + 2S- 8D5/2 1S-2S + 2S-12D3/2 1S-2S + 2S-12D5/2 1S-2S + 1S - 3S1/2 Havg = 0.8779 +- 0.0094 fm µp : 0.84087 +- 0.00039 fm

proton charge radius (fm)

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 47

slide-107
SLIDE 107

Rydberg constant from hydrogen

2S – 4P resonance at

88±0.5 ◦ and 90±0.08 ◦

  • A. Beyer,
  • L. Maisenbacher,
  • K. Khabarova,

C.G. Parthey,

  • A. Matveev, J. Alnis, R. Pohl, N. Kolachevsky, Th. Udem and

T.W. Hänsch

Apparatus used for H/D(1S-2S)

C.G. Parthey, RP et al., PRL 104, 233001 (2010) C.G. Parthey, RP et al., PRL 107, 203001 (2011)

486 nm at 90◦ + Retroreflector ⇒ Doppler-free 2S-4P excitation 1st oder Doppler vs. ac-Stark shift

∼ 2.5 kHz accuracy (vs. 15 kHz Yale, 1995) cryogenic H beam, optical excitation to 2S

  • A. Beyer, RP et al., Ann. d. Phys. 525, 671 (2013)

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 48

slide-108
SLIDE 108

New hydrogen 2S→4P at MPQ!

0.8 0.85 0.9 0.95 1

2S1/2 - 2P1/2 2S1/2 - 2P1/2 2S1/2 - 2P3/2 1S-2S + 2S- 4S1/2 1S-2S + 2S- 4D5/2 1S-2S + 2S- 4P1/2 1S-2S + 2S- 4P3/2 1S-2S + 2S- 6S1/2 1S-2S + 2S- 6D5/2 1S-2S + 2S- 8S1/2 1S-2S + 2S- 8D3/2 1S-2S + 2S- 8D5/2 1S-2S + 2S-12D3/2 1S-2S + 2S-12D5/2 1S-2S + 1S - 3S1/2 Havg = 0.8779 +- 0.0094 fm µp : 0.84087 +- 0.00039 fm

proton charge radius (fm)

Proton is small in regular hydrogen, too!

Proton radius puzzle is NOT “solved”. Our main systematics do NOT affect the previous measurements.

PRELIMINARY! 2S → 4P

1/2 and 4P 3/2

cold H(2S) beam

  • ptically excited (1S → 2S)

∆ν ∼ 2 kHz ≡ Γ/10′000 !!!

Beyer, Maisenbacher, Matveev, RP , Khabarova, Grinin, Lamour, Yost, Hänsch, Kolachevsky, Udem, submitted (2016)

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 49

slide-109
SLIDE 109

The nuclear chart

Neutron number N Proton Number Z

H D T n

1 2 3

He He He He

3 4 6 8

Be

7

Be

8

Li

6

Li

7

Li

8

Li

9

Li

11

Be

9

Be

10

Be

11

Be

12

0.8775 (51) 2.1424 (21) 1.9730 (160) 1.6810 ( 40) 2.0680 (110) 1.7550 (860) 1.9290 (260) 2.5890 (390)

electron scattering muonic atom spectroscopy H/D: precision laser spectroscopy + theory (a lot!)

6He, 8He, ...: laser spectroscopy of isotope shift

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 50

slide-110
SLIDE 110

The nuclear chart - new charge radii

Neutron number N Proton Number Z

H D T n

1 2 3

He He He He

3 4 6 8

Be

7

Be

8

Li

6

Li

7

Li

8

Li

9

Li

11

Be

9

Be

10

Be

11

Be

12

0.8775 (51) 2.1424 (21) 1.9730 (160) 1.6810 ( 40) 2.0680 (110) 1.7550 (860) 1.9290 (260) 2.5890 (390)

Neutron number N Proton Number Z

H D T n

1 2 3

He He He He

3 4 6 8

Be

7

Be

8

Li

6

Li

7

Li

8

Li

9

Li

11

Be

9

Be

10

Be

11

Be

12

0.8775 (51) 2.1424 (21) 1.9730 (160) 1.6810 ( 40) 2.0680 (110) 1.7550 (860) 1.9290 (260) 2.5890 (390) 0.8409 ( 4) 2.1277 ( 2) 1.67xx ( 5) 1.96xx ( 10) 2.06xx ( 80) * * * * * = preliminary 1.9xxx (246)

electron scattering muonic atom spectroscopy H/D: precision laser spectroscopy + theory (a lot!)

6He, 8He, ...: laser spectroscopy of isotope shift

laser spectroscopy of muonic atoms/ions

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 50

slide-111
SLIDE 111

Summary

Results from muonic hydrogen and deuterium: Proton charge radius: rp= 0.84087 (39) fm Proton Zemach radius: RZ = 1.082 (37) fm Rydberg constant: R∞ = 3.2898419602495 (10)rp (25)QED ×1015 Hz/c Deuteron charge radius: rd = 2.12771 ( 22) fm from µH + H/D(1S-2S) The “Proton radius puzzle” muonic helium-3 and -4: charge radius 10x more precise. No big discrepancy H(2S-4P) gives revised Rydberg ⇒ small rp PRELIMINARY New projects: 1S-HFS in muonic hydrogen / 3He ⇐ PSI, J-PARC, RIKEN-RAL, ... LS in muonic Li, Be, B, T, ...; muonic high-Z, ... 1S-2S and 2S-nℓ in Hydrogen/Deuterium/Tritium, He+ He, H2, HD+,... Positronium ≡ e+e−, Muonium ≡ µ+e− Electron scattering: H at lower Q2, D, He Muon scattering: MUSE @ PSI ...

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 51

slide-112
SLIDE 112

Future: Muonic

The world’s most intense beam for low-energy µ−

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 52

slide-113
SLIDE 113

Future: Muonic

The world’s most intense beam for low-energy µ− 1S-HFS in µp, µ3He

→ Zemach (magnetic) radius

[fm]

Z

Proton Zemach radius R

1 1.02 1.04 1.06 1.08 1.1 1.12

H, Dupays e-p, Friar H, Volotka e-p, Mainz p 2013 µ goal R-16-02 (CREMA-3)

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 52

slide-114
SLIDE 114

Future: Muonic

The world’s most intense beam for low-energy µ− 1S-HFS in µp, µ3He

→ Zemach (magnetic) radius

[fm]

Z

Proton Zemach radius R

1 1.02 1.04 1.06 1.08 1.1 1.12

H, Dupays e-p, Friar H, Volotka e-p, Mainz p 2013 µ goal R-16-02 (CREMA-3)

stop in µg of (radioactive) material

→ charge radii of higher Z

187 75 Re

  • prelim. 2016 data

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 52

slide-115
SLIDE 115

Future: Muonic

The world’s most intense beam for low-energy µ− 1S-HFS in µp, µ3He

→ Zemach (magnetic) radius

[fm]

Z

Proton Zemach radius R

1 1.02 1.04 1.06 1.08 1.1 1.12

H, Dupays e-p, Friar H, Volotka e-p, Mainz p 2013 µ goal R-16-02 (CREMA-3)

stop in µg of (radioactive) material

→ charge radii of higher Z

187 75 Re

  • prelim. 2016 data

stop µ− in Penning trap

→ charge radii of Li, Be, B, T

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 52

slide-116
SLIDE 116

Future: Electronic

Hydrogen apparatus in Garching

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 53

slide-117
SLIDE 117

Future: Electronic

Hydrogen apparatus in Garching Tritium = “missing link”

H T

1 2 3

He He

3 4

0.8775 (51) 2.1424 (21) 1.9730 (160) 1.6810 ( 40) 1.7550 (860) 0.8409 ( 4) 2.1277 ( 2) 1.67xx ( 5) 1.96xx ( 10) * *

rp= 0.8775( 51) fm → 0.8409(

4) fm

rd= 2.1424( 21) fm → 2.1277(

2) fm

rt = 1.7550(860) fm ⇒ potential improvement by 400! r2

d −r2 p = 3.82007(65) fm2 H/D(1S-2S) isoshift to 10 Hz

rt from T(1S-2S) to 10 kHz, later 1 kHz (theo. uncertainty)

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 53

slide-118
SLIDE 118

CREMA in 2009...

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 54

slide-119
SLIDE 119

... and 2014

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 55

slide-120
SLIDE 120

The cost for LHC

According to Forbes (Jul. 2012), the Higgs discovery cost

13.25 billion USD.

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 56

slide-121
SLIDE 121

The cost for LHC

According to Forbes (Jul. 2012), the Higgs discovery cost

13.25 billion USD.

We shrunk the proton radius by 4%.

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 56

slide-122
SLIDE 122

The cost for LHC

According to Forbes (Jul. 2012), the Higgs discovery cost

13.25 billion USD.

We shrunk the proton radius by 4%. This decreased the p-p cross section by 8%.

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 56

slide-123
SLIDE 123

The cost for LHC

According to Forbes (Jul. 2012), the Higgs discovery cost

13.25 billion USD.

We shrunk the proton radius by 4%. This decreased the p-p cross section by 8%. Cost increase for Higgs discovery: 1.06 billion USD.

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 56

slide-124
SLIDE 124

The cost for LHC

My aplogies. :-)

Randolf Pohl Birmingham, 8 Feb 2017 56