Quantcast
  • Register
PhysicsOverflow is a next-generation academic platform for physicists and astronomers, including a community peer review system and a postgraduate-level discussion forum analogous to MathOverflow.

Welcome to PhysicsOverflow! PhysicsOverflow is an open platform for community peer review and graduate-level Physics discussion.

Please help promote PhysicsOverflow ads elsewhere if you like it.

News

New printer friendly PO pages!

Migration to Bielefeld University was successful!

Please vote for this year's PhysicsOverflow ads!

Please do help out in categorising submissions. Submit a paper to PhysicsOverflow!

... see more

Tools for paper authors

Submit paper
Claim Paper Authorship

Tools for SE users

Search User
Reclaim SE Account
Request Account Merger
Nativise imported posts
Claim post (deleted users)
Import SE post

Users whose questions have been imported from Physics Stack Exchange, Theoretical Physics Stack Exchange, or any other Stack Exchange site are kindly requested to reclaim their account and not to register as a new user.

Public \(\beta\) tools

Report a bug with a feature
Request a new functionality
404 page design
Send feedback

Attributions

(propose a free ad)

Site Statistics

145 submissions , 122 unreviewed
3,930 questions , 1,398 unanswered
4,862 answers , 20,637 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
502 active unimported users
More ...

Internuclear Binding Force: Experimental geometric detail

+ 1 like - 0 dislike
13 views

I am looking for the most precise currently available deuterium potential energy curve (generated purely by experimental data) on the nucleon-nucleon scale. This is crucial. I need a radial cross-section from experiment, not theory. Would someone who is experienced in resourcefulness please direct me to an original, highly precise and accurate (and credible) source that is up-to-date?

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-07-13 04:41 (UCT), posted by SE-user user42825
asked Mar 19, 2014 in Theoretical Physics by user42825 (5 points) [ no revision ]
If this is for a research project, have you asked your adviser for a reference first? He/she may be able to give you a quick answer.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-07-13 04:41 (UCT), posted by SE-user DumpsterDoofus

1 Answer

+ 2 like - 0 dislike

Either the Nijmegen or Argonne v18 potentials are "realistic," meaning that they fit the two-body (pp,np) scattering data up to 350 MeV lab with $\chi^2$ per datum ~ 1. Using their names you can search online and the literature.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2014-07-13 04:41 (UCT), posted by SE-user MarkWayne
answered Mar 19, 2014 by MarkWayne (270 points) [ no revision ]

Your answer

Please use answers only to (at least partly) answer questions. To comment, discuss, or ask for clarification, leave a comment instead.
To mask links under text, please type your text, highlight it, and click the "link" button. You can then enter your link URL.
Please consult the FAQ for as to how to format your post.
This is the answer box; if you want to write a comment instead, please use the 'add comment' button.
Live preview (may slow down editor)   Preview
Your name to display (optional):
Privacy: Your email address will only be used for sending these notifications.
Anti-spam verification:
If you are a human please identify the position of the character covered by the symbol $\varnothing$ in the following word:
p$\hbar$ysics$\varnothing$verflow
Then drag the red bullet below over the corresponding character of our banner. When you drop it there, the bullet changes to green (on slow internet connections after a few seconds).
To avoid this verification in future, please log in or register.




user contributions licensed under cc by-sa 3.0 with attribution required

Your rights
...