Authors: George Rajna
A new paper published in Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics A will help scientists provide higher quality antiproton beams to experiments at CERN and antimatter facilities across the world. "Non-Gaussian beam dynamics in low energy antiproton storage rings" (J. Resta-López et.al) presents simulation studies undertaken to investigate the effects of beam heating phenomena present in antimatter decelerators.  Using the Continuous Electron Beam Accelerator Facility (CEBAF) at the Department of Energy's Jefferson Lab, a team of researchers has, for the first time, demonstrated a new technique for producing polarized positrons. The method could enable new research in advanced materials and offers a new avenue for producing polarized positron beams for a proposed International Linear Collider and an envisioned Electron-Ion Collider.  A study led by researchers from the has demonstrated a new, efficient way to accelerate positrons, the antimatter opposites of electrons. The method may help boost the energy and shrink the size of future linear particle colliders-powerful accelerators that could be used to unravel the properties of nature's fundamental building blocks.  More realistic versions of lattice QCD may lead to a better understanding of how quarks formed hadrons in the early Universe. The resolution of the Proton Radius Puzzle is the diffraction pattern, giving another wavelength in case of muonic hydrogen oscillation for the proton than it is in case of normal hydrogen because of the different mass rate. Taking into account the Planck Distribution Law of the electromagnetic oscillators, we can explain the electron/proton mass rate and the Weak and Strong Interactions. Lattice QCD gives the same results as the diffraction patterns of the electromagnetic oscillators, explaining the color confinement and the asymptotic freedom of the Strong Interactions.
Comments: 17 Pages.
[v1] 2016-08-31 08:41:46
Unique-IP document downloads: 19 times
Add your own feedback and questions here:
You are equally welcome to be positive or negative about any paper but please be polite. If you are being critical you must mention at least one specific error, otherwise your comment will be deleted as unhelpful.