Progress in

Particle and
Nuclear Physics
PERGAMON

Progress in Particle and Nuclear Physics 44 (2000) 3-28

http://www.elsevier.nl/locate/ppartnuclphys

Electron Scattering and Nuclear Structure at the S-DALINAC

A. RICHTER
Institut fiir Kerphysik,
Schlossgartenstrasse

Technische Universitiit Darmstadt,

9, D-64289 Darmstadt, Germany

ABSTRACT
Results on ongoing research of elementary electric and magnetic nuclear excitations at the superconducting Darmstadt
electron linear accelerator (S-DALINAC) are presented.
In the first part of this
lecture electric excitation modes in the continuum are discussed by way of two examples employing
the coincident detection of inelastically scattered electrons in an (e,ex) reaction. The first example is
the reaction *sC a ( e,en) where the excitation and decay of isoscalar electric monopole and quadrupole
giant resonances has been studied. The results on the strength distribution
and the partial exhaustion
of energy weighted sum rules are compared to those from RPA and second-RPA (SRPA) predictions
as well as to those from hadronic reactions of the type (p,p) and (p,pn). The second example, a
discussion of the BZr(e,ep) reaction and its results, can be viewed as a direct proof that in coincidence
reactions of the form (e,ex) one is able to isolate and identify narrow weakly excited levels - here
isobaric analog resonances - buried in the continuum and determine their excitation and decay properties and thus subtle nuclear structure properties.
The second part of the lecture is concerned with
high-resolution
inelastic electron scattering under 180 which is selective with respect to magnetic
excitations.
Of those, first systematic studies on the hitherto scarcely explored magnetic quadrupole
giant resonance which is mainly a spin-isospin excitation are presented.
As an example, results for
*Ca and Zr, in which a strongly fragmented
and quenched A42 strength has been detected, are
compared to SRPA and sum rules approaches. Evidence is presented for a new excitation mode, the
so called nuclear twist mode, and its parameters are determined.
In the third part of the lecture, the
possible use of transverse electron scattering form factors at low momentum transfer for an advc,catcti
test of in-medium modifications of vector mesons is critically examined, and finally an outlook is given
on the nuclear physics research program at the S-DALINAC.

KEYWORDS
EO, El, E2 excitations in the continuum; electric giant resonances; excitation and decay properties;
strength distributions
and sum rules; nuclear many-body
calculations;
M2 giant resonances; fragmentation and quenching of strength; sum rules; nuclear twist mode; transverse form factors and
in-medium modifications of vector mesons.
Work supported

by the DFG under contract

number Fti 12/242-Z.

0146~6410/00/$ - see front matter 0 2000 Published by Elsevier Science BV All rights reserved.
PII: SOl46-6410(00)00053-3

A. Richter / Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 44 (2000) 3-28

1. INTRODUCTION

@ (e,e) at 180 and

(e,ex) -Experiments

@ Radiation Physics and

(y,y) - Experiments

Figure
@

1: Schematic

in the accelerator

@ Free-Electron-Laser

@ (e,e) - Experiments

@ Radiation Physics and

Polarizability of the Nucleon

@ Optics Lab

layout
and

of the S-DALINAC
the experimental

an d It s experimental
hall,

stations

denoted

by 0

through

respectively.

The topics of this lecture

are central
ones in the research program of the superconducting
Darmstadt
electron linear accelerator (S-DALINAC).
Th is accelerator [l] provides continous wave (cw) electron
beams of very high quality between energies E. = 2.5 MeV and (presently)
120 MeV. As indicated
on the floor plan (Fig. 1) of the accelerator and experimental
hall, respectively,
those beams are
used for experiments
in radiation physics and photon scattering right behind the 10 MeV injector
on position @
Some of the most recent results in the field of nuclear resonance fluorescence
are
discussed in the contribution
of A. Zilges to these Proceedings.
On position @ a recently installed
Free-Electron-Laser
[2] provides tunable infrared light of wave lengths between 2.5 pm and 10 pm
for experiments
in the optics laboratory
@ . Experiments
on radiation physics at high electron
energies and in the near future - as pointed out in the outlook (Sect. 5) of this lecture on the
nucleon polarizabilities
- are performed in the experimental
hall at position @ . The place for
inclusive electron scattering under 180 and exclusive electron scattering experiments
of the (e,ex)
type is at beam position @ where a large solid angle QCLAM magnetic spectrometer
serves as a
work horse for these experiments.
In fact, in this lecture I will discuss solely electron scattering
experiments
performed at @ and their implications
for nuclear structure.
Finally, we have also
recently refurbished our high-resolution
electron scattering spectrometer
at position @ which was
essential for the discovery of the so called Scissors Mode fifteen years ago at the DALINAC [3]. It is
very exciting that this mode, which in its general properties is now phenomenologically
understood [4]
and which I have discussed extensively in the last Erice school on the same topic [5] as the present
one is now after a prediction entirely modeled in the spirit of nuclear physics [S] seen also in Bose
Einstein condensates
[7].

The lecture is composed of these main parts. Firstly, I will remark on the nature and our present
knowledge of some salient features of electric excitation modes in the continuum. I will illustrate this
topic by way of discussing in some detail two examples: The experimental
search for electric monopole
and quadrupole strength in 4sCa with the help of the 4sCa(e,en) reaction and the excitation and decay
of sharp isobaric analog resonances in the continuum of Zr studied through the Zr(e,ep) reaction.
Secondly, I will present the determination
of the magnetic quadrupole response, again in 4sCa and
Zr, and discuss it in the light of extensive model predictions and sum rules. Thirdly, I will try to
answer the question, if - as advocated in the literature - transverse electron scattering form factors

A. Richter / Prog. Parr. Nucl. Phys. 44 (2000) 3-28

at low momentum
mesons.

transfer

Finally,

Considering

are really

the

wealth

for its written

version

of the various

topics

list of references

of material
in these

tone

topic.

2.1.

First

example:

electric

Giant

multipole

resonances

Despite

considerable

understanding
plex
the

is still

nuclei

and

strength
most

above

particle

thresholds,

a dense

background

of both

processes

The

most

particle

of complex

developed

understanding.

In view

resonances
here

a study

and

quadrupole

two

favorable

interaction

in lighter

with

expected

scattering

The

in the giant

The

power

measurement

to
i.e.

interest.

and

the

even

continuum,

of high

but

scattering,

thus

is split

The

coincident

represents

mixing

into

quantitative

and

into

detection

[18-211.

developed
decay

role

excitation

T< = To = 4 and

into

of the

(e,en)
part)

of neutrons
present

task,

T,

into

and

combines

electromagnetic

unlike

in the

case

the coincidence

condition

background-free

response.

emission
radiation
have

of giant

which

so far only

on 4sCa

(GMR)

method

for the study

particle

of

reso-

dominates

environment

of

a few exploratory

been

obtained

with

[22, 23).
schematically

and GQR,

in energy

region
and

method

in the hostile

results

GDR

This

a nearly

in 4*Ca are sketched

GMR,

is lowest

possible,

precise

at

information

monopole

well-understood
information

on charged

best

As an example.

giant

scattering.

providing

works

of experimental

Furthermore,

and

which

for a test of our present

isoscalar

of the

experimental
The

properties

threshold

the

at the S-DALINAC

overlapping

resonance

emission

a versatile
concentrated

RPA

as a surprise.

structure

thereby

a considerable

performed

reactions

energetically

(upper

provide
mainly

lack

comes

electron

tail from elastic

have

complete

Effects

nuclear

(e,ex)

the

coincident
studies.

of the
cornerstones

and

mechanisms.

neutron

becomes

GDR

is expected,

the com-

a challenge

subject

our

multipolarities

excitations

form

(GDR)

genuine

the broad,

emission

via proton

is another

nu-

modes

established.
lie in the

particle-hole

4sCa

reaction

excitation

emission
The

from

almost

nucleus

complicated

been

populates

10 - 25 MeV.

lowest

represent

typically

on extensions
nuclei

dipole

structure

[lo-171.
have

giant

in 48Ca using

their

for (e,en)

the

closed-shell

modes

accelerator

new setup

in the atomic

elementary

for the

nuclei

states

magic

for nuclear

experiments

nuclei

investigations

The

isovector

of the type

an electron

lecture

to set the proper

behaviour

on these

strengths

the initial

are based

importance,

of the

be separated

So far,

complete

the first

Nuclei

are reasonably

mechanism

from

in (semi)

doubly

the radiative

Reactions
nances.

relaxation

models
data

of this

(GQR)

probes

removes

and

is found

medium-mass

multipole

emission

in the

aspects
can

hadronic

and

multiparticle-multihole

microscopic

[8]. Accordingly,

report

to present

is not clear.

shell closures
on giant

strength
dependence

giant

the dominant

direct

research

energy

in light
the

allowrd

to a summary

to give a fairly

asked

of collective

theoretical

compact

of their

Since

however,

been

space

only

CONTINUUM

manifestations
and

[8, 91. While

theories.

tried,

limited

essentially

of Hadrons

IN THE

of vector

in 4sCa

experimental

observed

the rather

myself

having

the Strucure

modifications

at the S-DALINAC.

lecture,

I have

that

MODES

are fundamental

limited

between

orally.

and

of in-medium

me to restrict

I hope

resonances

the systematics

advanced

discuss

Probes

giant

distributions

competition

and

test

program

in the actual
forces

EXCITATION

cleus.
in heavy

presented

Nevertheless,

on Electromagnetic

2. ELECTRIC

as a possible

of our research

Proceedings

I did present

at the end.

in the course
for this

suited

I will give an outlook

(E,

in a typical

= 9.98 MeV)

low-lying

the concidence

states

of 47Ca.

measurements

= To + 1 isospin

parts.

and

The

must
latter

in Fig.
energy

2. Electron

region

dominates
Above

17 2 MeV

be corrected
decays

of about
continuum
2n

for this.

preferentially

47K.
reaction
with

is demonstrated
the exclusive

data

in Fig.
(lower

3 which

part)

compares

for identical

an inclusive

kinematics.

48Ca(e,e)

A suppression

A. Richter / Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 44 (2000) 3-28

T = 912
-

20

15

T=3

%a+

T i: 912
2n

=
B

10

47K+p

T = 712

AT=O.l
AT=0

@.W
(P@l

47Ca +

TO=4
4%a

Figure 2: Excitation and decay modes in electron

the giant resonance region (& 2 10 - 25 MeV).

and proton

scattering

coincidence

of the radiative background by almost two orders of magnitude is visible, permitting

of the highly fragmented cross section in the giant resonance region.

10J

I
-

48Ca(

experiments

in

a clean extraction

e,e)

E, WV)
Figure 3: Comparison
kinematics.

of the inclusive

(e,e) and the exclusive

(e,en) reaction

on sC!a for identical

Data were taken at four momentum

transfers in the range q = 0.22 - 0.43 fm- in dominantly
longitudinal kinematics.
The large solid angle QCLAM magnetic spectrometer
at the S-DALINAC
was used for electron detection.
Decay neutrons were detected with six NE213 liquid scintillator
counters placed at angles between 0 and 90 (one at about 180) relative to the recoil momentum
axis. Details of the detector geometry and the calibration procedure including rescattering corrections
from the complex neutron and gamma shielding are described in [22].
After a 4n integration
(for details see (24)) th e resulting form factor summed over 4sCa excitation
energies 11 - 20 MeV is displayed in Fig. 4. The dashed and dotted lines are theoretical El and E2
form factors constructed from RPA transition densities (251.

Richter / Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 44 (2000) 3-28

Sum

--El

:
.

lo-

0.2

0.4
9

Figure

4: Formfactor

of the

dotted

lines

calculations

weighted

are

sum

Assuming

of both

excitation

performed.
while

RPA

fitted

at the

highest

converted

independence,

momentum

EO and

collective

for E,

El

and

a decomposition
transfers

transfer

= 11 - 20 MeV.

E2 excitations,

and

strengths

E2 form

cross

to the

presented

factors,

only

into the relative

measured

El

By extrapolation

to transition

summed

[25] f or collective

momentum

multipolarities.

reaction

(fm->
The
the

dashed

sohd

and

line is a

to the data.

energy

At the lowest

to other

4sCa(e,ern)

E2

sections

point

5 and

of both

cross

contributions

still

photon

m Figs.

the sum

here,

dominate,
the

6.

but

measured

Note

that

multipolarities

section

from

can be

3U% are due

about
cross

due

can

parts

E2 are negligible,
sections

to the

can

be

similarity

of

from

the

be determined

data.
An

important

(EWSR).

measure

For

81(12)%

the

for the

of monopole

GDR

and

(25/16x)B(EO),
hold

in distorted

number
The

given

GDR

B(E1)

quadrupole

parts.

At the

photon

which

can be derived

wave

calculations.

of the

flat

experiment.
found

in absolute

Evidence

In contrast
excitation
observations

The

assuming

before

(solid

squares)

of the limited

energy-weighted

= 11 - 25 MeV

E.

latter

point

in plane

to 46(6)%

measured

magnitude

the

represents

cross

section

wave formalism,
e.g. equal

resolution,

rules

corresponds

of

mixture

to B(E2)

also approximately

of the GMR

and

GQR,

the

EWSRs.
reactions

in Fig.

5 to the

global

variation

the

sum

an exhaustion

an unknown

but should

exhaustion

also in photoabsorption
is compared

we find

value

of the respective

is still within

and

quadrupole

from

the onset

for similar
magic

nucleus

to the experimental
energies

Thus,

model-independent

[ZS]. The corresponding

present

result.

Although

is in agreement

with

the

data.

monopole
distribution

exactly

translate

because

(e,en)

in the doubly

approach

would

distribution

analysis

summed

range

GQR.

less details

difference

are

energy
of the

showing

The

excitations

72(11)%

in 48Ca has been

The

excitation

and

above

strength

almost

of collective

measured

of about

strengths
around

12 MeV

uncertainties

in the

to the

lower

highest

highly fragmented
EO and E2 strength
40Ca (151, see upper part of Fig. 6.

results,
18 MeV

RPA
(see e.g.

one has to invoke the coupling

based on Green function

the systematic
displayed

methods

calculations
(27, 281).

of Fig.

energy

studied

distributions

predict
a compact
F or an understanding

to more complex

of both

part

an

in the present
has also been

ISGMR
and ISGQR
at
of the experimental

degrees of freedom.

allows for the inclusion

experiments
6 exhibits

of particle-hole

One quite successful

(p-h) configuratinns

A. Richter / Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 44 (2000) 3-28

0.0

20

16

Excitation
Figure 5: Experimental

B(El)

strength distribution

Full circles are data from a photonuclear

calculation

including

configurations

Energy

lplh@phonon

24

(MeV)

derived from the formfactor

configurations

analysis (histogram).

[ZS]. Th e solid line represents

experiment

and ground

state correlations

a continuum
induced

RPA

by these

[29].

16

20

12

Excitation
Figure 6: Comparison

of the experimental

from electron

coincidence

configurations

and ground

[15, 311 and 4sCa [23, 291.

experiments

summed

Energy
B(E0)

with a continuum

state correlations

induced

24
(MeV)

and B(E2) strength distribution inferred

RPA calculation including lplh@phonon

by these configurations

(solid lines) for 40Ca

A. Richter / Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 44 (2000) 3-28

coupled to low-lying collective vibrations, which is known to be a dominant mechanism for the damping
of giant resonances, and the g.s. correlations induced by them [29]. Within this model, experimental
findings of significant EO and E2 strengths e.g. in 40Ca at excitation energies well below the main
RPA peak expected around 18 MeV [15, 301 could be traced back to the additional g.s. correlations
[31]. Application of this model to giant resonances in 4sCa has been reported in [29]. The predicted
B(E1) distribution
is included as solid line in Fig. 5. Except for an overall shift of about 1 MeV
towards higher energies good agreement is found for the overall shape and the absolute magnitude.
Model results of [29] for the (E2+EO) strength in 4*Ca are shown as solid lines in the lower part of
Fig. 6. The strong fragmentation
and the dominance of strength in the interval E, v 13 - 18 MeV are
satisfactorily reproduced.
The calculations indicate about equal contributions
of EO and E2 strength
with local maxima shifted relative to each other, thereby leading to a rather leveled-out distribution.
However, the absolute magnitude is overpredicted by a factor of two. Such a large discrepancy is hard
to understand
in the light of the almost perfect description of the analogous strength distribution in
40Ca deduced from (e,ex) experiments
(311. Wh en comparing the strengths in the energy interval
E, = 11 - 20 MeV covered in both nuclei a somewhat smaller value S(E2) = 63(g)% EWSR is found
in 4sCa than S(E2) = 76(16)% EWSR observed in 40Ca , but the difference is too small to explain
the discrepancy with respect to the model results. On the other hand, it may be in parts be due to
the large amount of EO strength predicted at excitation energies below E, = 16 MeV which was not
present in earlier calculations using the same model [32]. It would be desirable to repeat the multipole
decomposition
using transition densities of [29] m order to be more consistent.
Alternatively,
we are
presently (in collaboration
with J. Wambach) developing a model description within the second-RPA
(SRPA) approach [33].
As pointed out in the introductory
remarks to this section, understanding
the role of direct and
statistical contributions
to the decay represents a central question of giant resonance research. Here,
electro-induced
coincidence experiments provide unique possibilities.
The experiment is kinematically
complete, so one can reconstruct
the excitation spectrum of the residual nucleus 47Ca populated in
the 4sCa(e,en) reaction.
Since El cross sections dominate in the investigated
momentum transfer
range, we choose as an example in Fig. 7 the lowest q value measured where contributions
from other
multipoles can be neglected.
1.0

11.
7/z

24,

i
II

, 1d3;2

Ya(e,en)

b
IL

e
5 = 400
00 MN
E:

11-17 MaV

%/Jf;:,

Excitation

Energy in Co (t&N)

Figure 7: Population of states in the residual nucleus 47Ca through

matics favoring excitation of the GDR. The dotted areas correspond
normalized not to overshoot the data.

the 4sCa(e,en) reaction for kineto a statistical model predictions

Excitation of the g.s. and well-known low-lying levels of 47Ca can be clearly identified in Fig. 7. The
shaded area displays the prediction of statistical model calculations with the code CASCADE modified
to take isospin properly into account. The calculation is normalized not to overshoot the data. At

10

A. Richter / Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 44 (2000) 3-28

higher 47Ca energies good agreement is found, but the experimental population of the g.s. and a group
of 1/2+ and 3/2+ levels at about 2.6 MeV strongly exceeds the statistical expectations.
Their wave
functions exhibit a rather pure single-hole character with respect to the neutron-closed
shell in 4sCa
[34]. A check of the accuracy of the statistical model results is provided by the good description of the
decay to the first excited state in 47Ca at 2.014 MeV with J = 3/2- which has a more complicated
structure with large (lp-2h) components
[35]. The excess population of single-hole states in 47Ca is
therefore interpreted
as the signature of direct decay contributions.
It corresponds to 39(5)% of the
total El strength in 4*Ca This fraction is found to be independent
of excitation energy within the
experimental
uncertainties.
Large decay contributions
of the IVGDR resonance were also observed in
40Ca [15] and generally in &shell nuclei 136). The present results indicate an extension of this feature
into the fp-shell (see also (371).
Finally, it is instructive to combine and complement the (e,ex) studies discussed here with hadron
induced reactions. Giant resonances in the nuclei 40*4sCa have been studied in proton induced coincidence experiments at the NAC, Faure, South Africa in collaboration
with groups from Johannesburg,
Cape Town and Stellenbosch [38-401. Figure 8 compares the 48Ca excitation (1.h.s) and Ca residual
nucleus spectra (r.h.s.) obtained from (e,en) and (p,pn) reactions, respectively.
The excitation spectra differ considerably, partly due to the different momentum transfers favoring L = 1 for the former
and L = 2,3 for the latter reaction, and partly due to the different reaction mechanisms (isovector
strength is suppressed in proton scattering).
Furthermore,
despite the coincidence condition a complex
background smoothly increasing with E. is expected below the resonance cross sections in the case
of (p,p). The excitation spectra in the daughter nucleus 47Ca demonstrate
that the same low-lying
levels are populated in both experiments.
Also, the branching ratios are very similar with exception
An explanation has to await
of the decay to the 47Ca g.s. which is much stronger in proton scattering.
a more detailed analysis of the statistical model predictions for the resonance decay and the role of
various background reactions.

10

15
20
E, in Ca (t&V)

25

Figure 8: Comparison of (e,en) and (p,pn) studies

excitation 4sCa excitation spectra. R.h.s: Excitation

0
2
4
E, in Co (t&V)
on giant resonances in 48Ca. L.h.s.: Coincident
spectra in the residual nucleus 47Ca.

Recently, we have also made considerable progress in the quantitative analysis of mixed giant resonance
strength from the angular correlations to resolved final states [39, 40). This provides e.g. important
insight into a longstanding
and still unsolved problem [41]: for the particularly simple case of the of
a decay from the GR region to the g.s. of 36Ar (Initial and final state and emitted particle all have
J = O+) a discrepancy is found in the EWSR fractions of GMR and GQR deduced from electronand a-induced reactions [16] which casts some doubt on the procedures to convert hadron scattering

A. Richter /Pmg.
cross

sections

into

Furthermore,
be shown

that

example:

As discussed

in the

contributions
ever,

it has

identify

reveal

by varying

Black

and

levels

Here,

dipole

(p,p)

(p,~)
idea

isospm

I discuss

(e,p)

the

and

(7,~)

numbers

isobaric

= l-

and

or -y emission

which

in Zr

been

subject

predominantly

for this

excite

time

resonance
level,

9. There,

decays

by neutron

emission
MeV

Due

1431.
in the

above

of the

investigations

to levels
selection

*Y(p,yc)

the peak

represents

in OY with

to isospin

multipoles
a powerful,

the full potential

information
area

and

properties

different

70 keV)
just

experimental

the hatched

at 3.160

decay

interest

(I? x
sitting

How-

to isolate

provides

exploited

of the experimental

of a level

their

electroexcitation

of numerous

Z, = 20 + 1 = 6, respectively.

is expected

to determine

important

resonances.

be able

level of long-standing

This

provide

of giant

should

for the first

a narrow

MeV

in Fig.

(IAR)

that

well

[42].

experiments

properties

allow

[39].

[40]. It can

in Zr

one can selectively

of a single

(for a summary

is sketched
analog

and

Since

to observe

h as since

reactions

20 = 5, which

is the

first

(e,ex)

decay

emphasized

example
details

resonances

test

time

- can be modeled

of reaction

experiments

continuum

information.

of 16.28

(GDR)

of 4sCa,
and

an independent

for the first

reactions

type

analog

coincidence

it has been

a recent

energy

of the experiment

T< :

such

the structural

resonance

state

proton

structure

(441 were

of isobaric

in the

transfer

to extract
Tanner

that

knockout

for this

for the example

provide

is achieved

- quasifree

of the excitation

buried

nuclear

at an excitation

giant

section

results

channels

kinematics

spectroscopy

advocated

weak

probe.
probe

reaction

MeV

been

subtle

extreme

understanding

the momentum

versatile
of this

basic

also

narrow,

which

previous

40Ca(p,pcz)

emission

component

despite

Complete

to our

Here,

of nucleon

background

experiment

Second

strengths.

analysis

the main

in the present

2.2.

transition

succesful

Part. Nucl. Phys. 44 (2000) 3-28

The

the GDR

with

in Zr.

The

spin-isospin
rules

with

see [45].)

16.28

quantum

only

decay

by

Tc + 1 state.

GDA; To

IAR; Jn=l -; To + 1

5/2-.312 ~

To _ 112

g/2+T,, + l/2
l/2-_

sev+p

ssZr + n

Jn = O+; T,

Zr
Figure
decay

of J; T = 1~ ; To + 1 IAR in Zr

9: Excitation
to Y

neutron

The

emission

hatched

ground

state

following

electroexcitation

dominant

Measurements

and

the underlying

relevant

low-lying

T = To GDR

hole states

which

in the proton

preferentially

decays

via

electron

respectively.

The

while

the parent

state

itself

carries

only

configuration
a small

coupled

spectroscopic

to the
strength

aimed at discernmg
the full
[46]. 0 ur experiment
MeV by measuring
the proton
decay channels
of it
a population
of low-lying
levels In
reactio n One expects

2ds,s neutron
configuration
= l-; 6 IAR at E, = 16.28
in the Zr(e,ep)

hole

were

for incident

[44] to be a vr2d3,2 particle

of this level was deduced

wave function,

5 = 0.18 for the analog

structure
of the J; T,
with

indicates

to sZr.

So far, one component

Y

area

structure

performed
energies

reasons

(2pi,s,

lgs/z,

at effective
and

for the

scattering
specifice

2ps/s,

lfs,s)-i.

momentum
angles
choice

transfers
E,

(0,)

of these

qeff

= 0.277

= 85 MeV

kinematical

(40)

settings

fm-
and

and

0.445

102 MeV

will become

fm-
(55),

clear

in

12

A. Richter / Prog. Par!. Nucl. Phys. 44 (2000) 3-28

the discussion below. A set of eight AE-E detector telescopes was used to measure the protons. The
dynamic range of the detector telescopes allowed us to study the 12 - 18.5 MeV excitation energy
region of Zr, feeding levels up to E, = 5 MeV in sQY. The 1.h.s. of Fig. 10 shows the measured cross
sections in this excitation region for incident electrons of energy E. = 85 MeV. In the upper part the
inclusive inelastic electron scattering spectrum is shown. Here, one only sees broad bumps due to the
predominant
GDR strength on top of the radiative tail with no indication of any resolved excitation.
The lower part displays the inelastic scattering spectrum gated with coincident proton emission. The
sharp resonance at 16.28 MeV clearly stands out above the GDR, and a further known J = l- IAR
in Zr at E. = 14.43 MeV is visible.
Because the parent state in Y exhibits a simple particle-hole (p-h) s t ructure, it is instructive to take a
look at the shell-model configurations
of which the IAR wave function (r.h.s. of Fig. 10) may consist.
In good approximation
the closed N = 50 shell leads to vanishing neutron contributions.
Proton
configurations
are formed by (3si,s, 2&/z) particle and (2pi,s, 2ps,z, lfs,z) hole states. Because of the
2 = 40 subshell closure the role of the lgQ/s configuration should be small. In principle, excitation of
the 2dz.12 shell is also possible, but exluded on the basis of the analysis shown below.

g,2
;;,,,
5/?

2P3,2

Excitation Energy in OOZr(t&V)

Figure 10: L.h.s.: Electron scattering spectra at E, = 85 MeV and scattering angle 0. = 40. Top,
Singles spectrum,
where only broad bumps are seen. Bottom:
Spectrum in coincidence with an
emitted proton. Note the cross section scale difference. R.h.s.: Microscopic structure of J = l- IAR
in Zr. Allowed proton p-h transitions are indicated by arrows.
The excitation spectrum in the final state nucleus Y related to the 16.28 MeV IAR is presented in the
left part of Fig. 11. Proton groups corresponding
to the decays into the low-lying levels at E, = 0.00
MeV (J = l/2-),
Em = 1.51 MeV (J = 5/2-) and E, = 1.74 MeV (J = 3/2-),
respectively,
are visible, but no evidence for a population of the first excited state at 0.91 MeV (J = g/2-) nor
to higher-lying states is observed.
Using a fit to two Gaussians with the width determined by the
g.s. decay, the relative 5/2- and 3/2- line contents could be disentangled.
The experiment further
showed that the dependence of the GDR proton decay on the Zr excitation energy is completely
governed by the transmission coefficients [47]. Thus, the giant resonance part underlying the IAR can
be determined from the product of the GDR cross section taken from a Lorentzian parametrization
[48] times the predicted branching ratios interpolated
to the 16.28 MeV region.
Decay proton angular distributions
from the IAR relative to the virtual photon direction are well
fitted by a polynomial function W(0) = Ao. [I + AZ . &(cosO)], with the same AZ coefficient for
alll final states. From these angular correlation data the total cross section at the two momentum
transfers for the population of a specific level in ssY is obtained by integrating over proton angles. In

13

A. Richter / Pmg. Part. Nucl. Phys. 44 (2000) 3-28

I,,

30 -

PO

pi

p2 p3

11

E,=

85

MeV

og= 40
Op= 160

20

I\
,.

fi
I,

10 r
,
0

Excitation
Figure

Example

taken

ratios

J = l-

decay width

is the Mott
resolution,

in good agreement

with earlier

du

du

Zi

= c-1dR

cross section,

and 9(3)%,

in a total
[44, 491.

to the g.s., second

and third

and 3/2-

widths

The

or alpha particle

partial

from these

data,

a specific

the (e,ep)

cross section

level in sgY may be

of the resonance
final state.

branching

states

experiments

in Y

Ii/rtor

keV,

of 65(7)%,

with the estimates

determine

from this information

in the literature

Itol its

corrected

riot = 80(30)

ratios

comply

level,

Our data,

could not separately

can be determined

have been reported

form factor

(1)

measured

excited

MeV,

of Eq. (2) for the

&

to the higher levels in sgY and no branchings

decay channels

= 16.28 MeV
the IAR decay

component.

th e f orm factor

The

0.6

of the 16.28

width of the 16.28 MeV resonance

results

any population

form factor
wave function

populating

IWN

Mott

IF(q)]

that earlier

branchings.

scattering

width of decay to a particular

result

in seY for the E,

The dashed line is due to a n(2p;,is3s,,z)

of the resonance

[50, 511. It should also be remarked

not observe

electron

0.5

(fm-7

The fits to determine

the phenomenological

decay of the resonance

and I?; the partial

for the instrumental

spectrum

= 160.

for a 2d3i2 or 3si/r particle

as

26(6)%,

Inelastic

parameters

and subsequent

(do/dR)Mott

where

R.h.s.:

excitation

= 40 and 0,

0.4

q.,,

nucleus

0.

I,,

0.3

(MeV)

of a residual

the physical

0.2

giving the best fit to the data.

order to deduce

total

difference

The solid line represents

the strong

for the excitation

written

in

are indicated.

sign combination

t.

at E. = 85 MeV,

level in Zr.

demonstrating

2
Energy

11: L.h.s.:

branching

region in Zr

because

to isospin forbidden

of

the 5/2we did

neutron

[45].

AZ coefficient resulting from the angular correlation data agrees with theoretical
estimates
for
d-wave proton emission. As the three final states populated in ssY are nearly pure single proton hole

The

states,

the simplest

the particle

limit for a possible

The proton
result

of the 16.28 MeV 1eve1 will consist

configuration

in the 2dsp shell.

The 1g9,s configuration

branching

decay branching

in the follwing

is less than 2% (see 1.h.s of Fig.

ratios

wave function

116.28 MeV, J;T,

relative

to the Zr

deduced

strength

of the parent

The phenomenological
DWBA.

According

analog

wave function

From the four possible

components

with

since the upper

11).

above and corrected

for the d-wave penetrability

state

* 0.692p3,2 * 0.591fs,r)-

to Eq. (2), 18% of the strength

in the 2ds/s shell coupled to the sgY ground state.

particle

lp-lh

significantly

factors

of the 16.28 MeV IAR

= 1-i 6) = ]K (0.422~,,~

ground state.

of three

does not contribute

This corresponds

at 3.160 MeV in Y

of Eq. (2) can be utilized

sign combinations

exactly
observed

to calculate

in Eq. (2), one (+ + -)

2ds,z)

(2)

are due to a single proton

to the 2ds/s neutron
in stripping

reactions

single
[46].

the scattering

form factor in

can immediately

be excluded

A. Richter / Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 44 (2000) 3-28

by comparison to experiment.
The other three are compatible with the data, but the case of equal signs
(+ + +) shown in the right part of Fig. 11 provides a superior description.
Also shown as dashed curve
is the form factor for a pure rr(2p$s3a1,r) configuration.
The two experimental
momentum transfer
values chosen are sufficient to test the role of a 2ds/r vs. a 3ai/s particle component.
Clearly, the data
can be explained without any significant 3ai/r contribution.
In passing we note that the wave functions
for the different sign combinations
exhibit a very distinct behaviour at higher momentum transfers,
and it may be possible to unambiguously
determine the signs of the different components in Eq. (2)
with a further measurement
at qcff > 0.6 fm-i. Furthermore,
the transition strength at the photon
to I-r0 = 108(35) eV, in
point is extracted to be B(E1,16.28)?=
7.2(2.3) x lo- * efm*, corresponding
good agreement with previous work [49-511.
As the IAR rides on a huge continuum of the Zs states with the same spin forming the giant dipole
resonance, some isospin mixing is expected expressed usually by a spreading width IL. Systematics
[52] predict l? G 15 keV in the A = 90 mass region. Its inclusion would lead to an overall reduction
of about 20% of the escape widths into the proton channels according to Ptot = xi Ipi + l? which
cannot be excluded on the basis of the present experimental
uncertainties.
However, the form factor
results - and thus the derived g.s. decay width - would not be affected by such a correction.

3. SPIN AND ORBITAL

MAGNETIC

QUADRUPOLE

EXCITATION

MODES

3.1. General remarks

Magnetic spin and convection currents of the nucleus, because of their elementary nature, are subjects
Magnetic dipole (Ml) transitions
have been
of continuous experimental
and theoretical interest.
studied intensively with emphasis on the problem of quenching (i.e. a reduction of the transition
strength with respect to the most advanced model predictions) of the spin part. It is now commonly
accepted that the quenching results from a combination
of coupling to configurations
outside the
model spaces via the nuclear tensor force and admixtures of the delta isobar. The latter are small
(see [53] for recent work).
Much less is known about magnetic quadrupole (M2) excitations whose spin part should also be modified by the mechanisms discussed above. The few available data indicate a quenching even stronger
than for the Ml strength [54]. The spin part of the M2 strength is directly related to the J = 2component of spin-dipole excitations
[55, 561 o b served in hadron scattering experiments
whose spin
decomposition
is a central goal of recent experimental
efforts [57]. The amount of quenching and the
MZ-strength
distributions
in ad- and fpshell
nuclei are also key ingredients for a detailed modeling
of the late stages of heavy stars before a supernova collapse [58, 591 and for the Y-nucleosynthesis
process [60]. Calculations of the M2 response in nuclei have been performed in various microscopic
approaches [61-63). Although the centroid of the observed M2 strength distribution
is roughly reproduced on the RPA level taking into account one lp-lh excitations,
the strong fragmentation
of the
mode can only be described by coupling to the large number of 2p-2h states.
There is furthermore
a fundamental
interest in verifying the possible existence of an orbital M2
resonance in spherical nuclei. Such an excitation, predicted originally within a fluid-dynamic approach
for finite Fermi systems [64] and named twist mode, can be viewed as a rotation of different layers of
fluid against each other with a rotational angle proportional to the distance along the axis of rotation.
Having no restoring force in an ideal fluid, its experimental
observation would be direct proof of the
zero sound character of giant resonances in nuclei which can be interpreted
as vibrations of an elastic
medium, in contrast to the hydrodynamical
picture 181. B ac k ward electron scattering presents the
most promising tool to search for such a mode [65-671. The results discussed here aim at a solution
of some of these open questions [68].

15

A. Richter / Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 44 (2000) 3-28

3.2. Examples:

the magnetic

quadrunole

response

in 4sCa and Zr

We have chosen to study sC!a and Zr as first examples of a systematic

investigation
of the M2
spin quenching as well as to search for experimental
indications of the orbital twist mode. Modern
developments
of SRPA theories [33] p rovide a promising tool for a realistic description of the M2
strength distributions
in medium-mass
and heavy nuclei.
Electron scattering
at 180 is particulary
suited for the study of magnetic transitions
because of
the strong suppression of longitudinal
excitations including the radiative tail dominated by elastic
scattering.
Thus, it serves as a filter for transverse excitations.
Exceptional
features compared to
similar previous devices can be achieved [69] at the S-DALINAC by the coupling of the 180 system to
the large solid-angle, large momentum acceptance QCLAM spectrometer.
This experimental
progress
permits investigations
[70] even of extremely weak excitations
as demonstrated
for the example of
an l-forbidden
MI transition
in 3s ( see also the contribution
of P. von Neumann-Cosel
to these
Proceedings).
An important improvement
over previous 180 experiments
was achieved by using a 10 MHz pulsed
beam. It allows to determine the time-of-flight
(TOF) of electrons with respect to the beam pulse
(711, thereby permitting
a distinction of electrons scattered off the target from those of background
sources (e.g. the Faraday cup or slit systems). With this technique the signal to background ratio in
the measured spectra could be increased by up to an order of magnitude.
Compared to the limited
information from previous (e,e) experiments,
these experimental
developments allow an extraction of
the entire M2 response over large excitation energy regions essential for an answer to the problems
raised above.
Data were taken at incident electron energies Es = 42.4, 66.4, and 82.2 MeV corresponding
to momentum transfers p = 0.38, 0.62, and 0.78 fm-. The resulting spectra are displayed in Fig. 12 for the
example of 4*Ca. Note the very low background, especially for Eo = 66 and 82 MeV. The variation
with incident energy is compabtible with an interpretation
as the remnant radiative tail due to elastic
scattering (the effective scattering angle is 178.5). At energies E, > 11 MeV the level density of excited 2- states becomes very high leading to a considerable fragmentation
of the transition strength.
Thus, the unfolding procedure of the spectra as a superposition
of discrete lines applied at lower
excitation energies is no longer possible. Parts of the M2 strength might be hidden in the background
of the spectra.

O - 4sCa(e,e)
.9

rao*

if-:

10
0
4

a
Excitation

Figure 12: Upper part: Inelastic electron scattering

incident energies Eo = 42.4, 66.4 and 82.1 MeV.

10
Energy

12

1.4

(MeV)

spectra

of 4aCa taken

at 0 = 180 and three

16
A solution
treatment,
details see
experiment,
(48Ca) and
fluctuations

A. Richter / Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 44 (2000) 3-28

to this problem is provided by a fluctuation analysis technique based upon a statistical

i.e. assuming Wigner-type
level spacings and Porter-Thomas
intensity distributions
(for
(721). To extract the total B(M2)t strength in the excitation energy region covered by the
an analysis similar to the one in Ref. [73] was performed in the intervals E, = ll- 15 MeV
7 - 12 MeV (Zr). At higher energies in Zr one probably enters the regime of Ericson
which precludes application of the above method.

The resulting M2 strength distribution is displayed in the top part of Fig. 13 for the example of Zr.
While the centroid is reasonably reproduced,
attempts
to describe its complex structure by RPA
calculations (middle part) fail independent
of details of the residual interaction.
One has to invoke
the SRPA which extends the model space to include 2p-2h excitations on the correlated ground state.
Since both mean-field and collisional damping are included, the SRPA is well suited for a description
of the fine structure of nuclear modes [8, 741.

100

d 0
,, 1000
E

500

-2

9
g

200

100
0

Excitation

Figure 13: Comparison

of the M2 strength
calculations described in the text.
When evaluated

in a basis of RPA states

10
Energy

distribution

1~) the strength

12

14

(t&V)

in Zr

function

with results

of RPA and SRPA

takes the form [33]

SF(E) = -~lm~(Ol~tl~)G,~(E)(~'~~~O)
vu

where P denotes the operator

to the current operator

$4 = g
where grk and gck)
I are the
account distortions of the
by convoluting the current
Greens function in Eq. (3)
G,,l(E)

of the perturbing

field. In the case of magnetic

excitations,

P couples

& (4{V,G(r-r~)}+g~k)(VXzk)J(r-rs))
orbital
electron
(4) with
is given

and spin g-factors of the le-th nucleon, respectively.

Taking into
in the static Coulomb field of the nucleus, F is then evaluated
the distorted waves of the incoming and outgoing electron. The
by

= (E - E, - Z,,(E)

+ iq)-l

- (E + E, + l&,(-E)

- iq)-l

(5)

where E, are the RPA eigenenergies.

The coupling to 2p-2h excitations results in a complex selfenergy
&I z A,,, - iijr,. After diagonalization
of the residual interaction, d, in the 2p2-h subspace it takes

A. Richter / Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 44 (2000) 3-28

17

the form

c,,(E) =

~(vllw,

_ ;, + ig(w4

(6)

To account
20 keV).

for finite energy resolution

in the experiment,

11in Eq. (6) is taken to be finite (typically

Details of the calculations are described in [68]. Taking into account coupling to 2p-2h excitations
in the SRPA calculation, the description is greatly improved as shown in the bottom part of Fig. 13.
Except for an overall shift of about 500 keV, the features of the M2 strength in sOZr are reproduced
remarkably well qualitatively as well as quantitatively.
In order to see to what extent the present results exhaust the theoretical M2 strengths it is instructive
to plot the running sums as a function of excitation energy (1.h.s. of Fig. 14). The hatched areas
indicate the experimental
uncertainties
dominated by the assumptions
on the level densities in the
fluctuation analysis. The experimental results exhaust 30% (4sCa) and 21% (sZr), respectively, of the
EWSR values calculated within RPA. The short-dashed
lines representing the SRPA results with freenucleon spin g-factors account quite well for the energy dependence, but overshoot the data. Invoking
an effective spin g-factor g:f = 0,64g!+, simultaneous
agreement is achieved for both nuclei in the
investigated
energy ranges. This quenching factor was adjusted to reproduce the Ml data in 4*Ca
[75]. The good agreement with the data demonstrates
that (assuming g(cff - g[) the spin quenching
of Ml and M2 strengths is very similar.

p 200
2

100

>
&
3

O
100

%
,

5:

5i

-0
Excitation

Energy

(MeV)

8
Excitation

Energy

12
(MeV)

and longFigure 14: L.h.s.:Running

sums of the B(M2) strengths in 4*Ca and sZr. The short-dashed
dashed lines are SRPA calculations with a free-nucleon and an effective spin g-factor 9: = 0.649?,
respectively, which was adjusted to reproduce the Ml strength in 48Ca. R.h.s.: SRPA results for the
into spin and orbital parts.
total B(M2) strength distribution
in Zr and the decomposition
Finally, the possible evidence for an orbital M2 mode is adressed. At present, arguments can only be
based on a decomposition
in the SRPA predictions.
The r.h.s. of Figure 14 shows the calculated total
One indeed finds
B( M2) distribution
in eZr and its separation into spin and orbital contributions.
significant orbital strength.
The interference pattern leads to a suppression of the total strength at
low excitation energies and an enhancement
above approximately
7 MeV. Because of the comparable
magnitudes of spin and orbital strengths, the constructive interference reaches maximum values in the
main bump of the M2 resonance around 9 MeV. Thus, the good agreement of the SRPA calculations
with the data (which would be completely spoiled in the absence of the orbital strength) provides a
strong argument for the presence of the twist mode.
A visualization of the twist mode is presented in Fig. 15. In the semiclassical prediction as a Fermi
liquid 1641, the upper and lower halves of a spherical nucleus rotate against each other. The velocity
distribution
of the fundamental
mode displayed on the r.h.s. of Fig. 15 corresponds
to a constant

18

A. Richter / Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 44 (2000) 3-28

angular velocity. Note that orbital M2 modes at higher frequency are also predicted which represent
more complicated motions with inner layers of one half rotating against out layers etc. The properties
of the twist mode can be characterized
by its total strength and the mean excitation energy (&)
which is related to the nuclear shear modulus ~1 [66, 761. For Zr one finds from the present work
B(M2)lt=
780 &fm,
(E,) = 9.7 MeV in reasonable agreement with the original prediction 1641,
B(A42)lt= 830 ,&fm, (&) = 9.0 MeV. Th e resulting shear mod& expressed in units of the nuclear
matter density p0 = 0.17 fm- are p/p0 = 6.3 MeV (48Ca),and 7.2 MeV (Zr). This corresponds to
41% (48Ca) and 47% (Zr), of th e nuclear matter value of 15.34 MeV. The overall reduction and the
relative differences in finite nuclei can be understood to arise from surface contributions.

Figure 15: L.h.s.: Schematic picture of the orbital

velocity distribution
of the fundamental
mode.

M2 twist mode predicted

by [64]. R.h.s.:

Angular

Clearly, the results presented here are a starting point only. Evidence for the twist mode is indirect
so far and a direct proof (e.g. through the different form factor dependence of spin and orbital parts)
must await future experiments.
For systematic tests of sum-rule predictions
[77-811 it would also be
of importance to establish these elementary magnetic quadrupole modes over a wide mass range, and
experiments
at the S-DALINAC are underway.

TRANSVERSE
TUM TRANSFER:

4.

ELECTRON
SCATTERING
FORM FACTORS AT LOW MOMENA TEST OF IN-MEDIUM MODIFICATIONS
OF VECTOR MESONS?

The modification
of nucleons and mesons by embedding them into the nuclear medium constitutes
a central problem of nuclear physics which is experimentally
addressed e.g. in high-energy heavyion reactions and electron scattering [82, 831. A n important prediction has been made by Brown and
Rho [84] that the effective masses should follow an approximate scaling corresponding
to the reduction
of the pion coupling constant jr. This behaviour can be understood
from a restauration
of chiral
symmetry at high baryon densities taking into account the scaling properties of QCD (85]. Although
it seems at first sight remote, electron scattering at low energies and momentum transfers might also
provide access to this problem. As an example, in-medium effects on fX and the pmeson mass lead
to a reduction of the isovector tensor interaction and a simultaneous
enhancement
of the spin-orbit
force [86]. The necessity of such corrections has been demonstrated
e.g. in studies of magnetic dipole
transitions in light [87] and heavy [88] nuclei.
Isovector trqnsverse electron scattering is sensitive to changes of the tensor part of the NN interaction.
Therefore, form factors of magnetic transitions
can be expected to be modified appreciably.
Such
effects were studied e.g. by Lallena [89] for the form factors of low-lying unnatural parity transitions

A. Richter / Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 44 (2000) 3-28

in 4sCa. His calculations

residual interaction [90]

were carried

out in the framework

of RPA using the Jiilich-Stony

v,., = Co(goCT1
.u2 + g; u1 .u2 r1 . T) +
The calculations

allow for a simultaneous

variation

19

;K(+EVp(E)

of mp and f,, expressed

Brook

(7)

by a parameter

where m* denotes the effective mass. For s = 1 the original interaction

of [90] is attained.
The
strength parameters gs and gb of the interaction were fixed to reproduce the energies and transition
strengths in sPb [91].
Transitions to the low lying J = 4- and J = 2- states at E. = 6.11 MeV and 6.89 MeV, respectively,
in *%a have been investigated
in detail by Lallena [89]. Experimental
data at low q are available
now from the measurements
described in the previous chapter. The form factors are shown in Fig. 16
together with data from MIT/Bates
[92] for q > 1 fm-. These are compared to calculations with
the interaction
(7) for s = 1 (solid line), 1.2 (dashed line), 1.6 (dotted line) and 2 (dashed-dotted
line). Strong effects due to the variation of L are visible. The new data gained on *sCa by our 180
experiments
previous section clearly provide an upper constraint of e z 1.2 by the behaviour of the
M2 transition around the first maximum of the form factor. On the other hand, the results for the
M4 transition confirm the need for a value e > 1 already inferred 1891from the higher-q data.

E, = 6.89 MN
.I = 2-

0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0

0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0

q,,,(fm-3

q.,,(fm-3

Figure 16: Form factors of the M4 and M2 transitions to the low lying J = 4- and J = 2- states at
E, = 6.11 MeV and 6.89 MeV in 48Ca measured in inelastic electron scattering
at the S-DALINAC
and MIT/Bates
[92]. The curves represent calculations with the interaction (7) for values t = 1 (solid
line), 1.2 (dashed line), and 1.6 (dotted line) and 2 (dashed-dotted
line).
A word of caution is necessary, however, because the calcuations are based on rather severe approximations.
In particular, QCD sum rules [93] predict a density dependence of the p-meson mass not
included in the above approach. Before one can draw quantitative conclusions on the effective p-meson
mass, one should reinvestigate
the form factors with the very successful SRPA description discussed
above (with and without variations of the effective masses) to get some insight on the significance of
the predictions of Ref. [89]. It should also be noted that a recent (p, $) experiment seems to question
the need for any introduction
of effective meson masses [94]. In order to allow some insight, we restrict
ourselves to a simpler interaction than used above in the calculations of the overall M2 response. It
consists of a central and tensor piece for r and p exchange including an explicit momentum transfer

20

A. Richter / Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 44 (2000) 3-28

dependence
Vcentral(q)

Ken,o,

$-_
()[

f ClQZTlTZ

&

fK1

clazTl72

&]

,
(9)

(9)

(&)

(3~lP~2Q

fllf12Q2)

[*

4,2*]

where Kl and K2 are constants.

Variations of the effective mass are restricted
to the p-meson.
Different values of E are denoted by Fxx (where FlO corresponds to c = 1.0 etc.). Note that for c = 1
and q = 0 the interactions
(7) and (9) coincide. Before application to our problem the interaction is
tested for the much-studied
form factor of the prominent Ml spin-flip transition in 4sCa [75], given
on the 1.h.s. of Fig. 17. A very good description is obtained rather independent
of the choice of L. A
variation between 1 (solid line) and 1.6 (dotted line) leads to a small variation at the first maximum
of the form factor only and without effects at higher q. A calculation with the M3Y interaction 1951
is practically indistinguishable
from the FlO result. A quenching factor of g: = 0.7lgp
is included
to achieve qualitative agreement.

10-'

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

qw (fm-9

Figure 17: L.h.s.: Form factor of the

calculations with the interaction
(9)
of the M4 form factor on the choice
nox = dashed-dotted
line). For M3Y

lO+

2.0

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0

q,

W3

prominent Ml spin-flip transition in 4sCa (751 in comparison to

and e = 1 (solid line) and 1.6 (dotted line). R.h.s: Dependence
of the interaction
(FlO = solid line, M3Y = dashed line, M3Y
nox, exchange terms are neglected [SS]).

Calculations for the experimental

form factors discussed in Fig. 16 assuming the same spin quenching
are summarized at Fig. 18. The best description for the M4 transition is obtained for e z 1. However, independent
of the choice of E the experimental
position of the second form factor maximum is
predicted at somewhat too high 4. The q dependence is well described for the M2 excitation for all
choices of e. Here, the first maximum exhibits considerable sensitivity to an in-medium reduction of
mP suggesting an optimum value E = 1.4. Thus, no consistent value of e can be extracted from an
analysis with the Fxx interaction
(9).
One obvious difference to the results of Lallena are much less dramatic effects when increasing e. The
overall reduction observed with decreasing rnP can be traced back to a modification of the g coupling
constant because of short-range correlations, as shown by Baym and Brown (961. One may speculate
that these differences mainly arise from the inclusion of MEC effects due to pion and seagull terms
by Lallena [89]. At present, one must conclude that, while magnetic form factors at low momentum
transfers exhibit considerable sensitivity to in-medium modifications
of vector mesons, the freedom
in the fixing parameters
of the residual interaction
(or the inclusion of MEC corrections)
lead to
effects of comparable magnitude.
This is demonstrated
in the r.h.s. of Fig 17 by comparison of the

A. Richter / Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 44 (2000) 3-28

1o-n

0.5

1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0

q,,,

(fm-1

0.5

1.0
q.,,

Figure 18: Same as Fig. 16, but calculations with the interaction
(dashed line), 1.4 (dashed-dotted
line) and 1.6 (dotted line).

1.5 2.0

2.5

3.0

(fm-9

(9) for values E : 1 (solid line), 1 2

with (dashed) and

the M4 form factor calculated with the FlO (solid line) and the M3Y interactions
without (dashed-dotted)
exchange part. The latter accounts successfully for the global M2 response
in closed-shell nuclei [68]. Thus, while inelastic electron scattering transverse from factors in nuclei
are a potentially interesting opportunity
to investigate in-medium properties of vector mesons, first
an optimum interaction has to be determined before quantitative
conclusions may be possible.

5. OUTLOOK
In the previous chapters I have presented a few examples for the relevant contributions
of electron
scattering at low momentum transfers to our understanding
of elementary excitation modes of nuclei.
Comcidence experiments
permit the decomposition
of giant resonance multipole strengths, even m
and simultaneously
provide deeper
the case of strongly fragmented
and overlapping distributions,
insight into the decay mechanisms.
On the other hand, as demonstrated
for the case of isobaric
analogue states, electron scattering coincidence experiments
enable complete spectroscopy
of weak
transitions
of great physical interest otherwise hardly accessible. Both aspects will be combined in
The doubly magic nucleus
planned investigations
of *Pb through (e,en) and (e,ep) experiments.
OsPb forms a cornerstone of modern microscopic models including the coupling to complex degrees
of freedom.
Such calculations
predict significant deviations from simple Lorentzian forms of the
Also, the poperties of the isoscalar giant dipole
strength distributions
(see [97] for an example).
Isobaric
resonance (ISGDR) recently identified for the first time [98] could be elucidated further.
analog resonances in sPb may be studied by (e,ep) ex p eriments similar to what was shown above
for Zr.
Another field where electro-induced
particle emission may be of great potential importance are new
ideas [99] on the nucleosynthesis
of the light elements Li, Be, iJIB which are neither produced in
stellar burning nor in the Big Bang. Recent data indicate that it must be a primary production process
which is incompatible
with previous models of high-energy spallation in the interstellar medium [loo].
One possible candidate would be inelastic neutrino scattering on C (and eventually 14N, 0) during
supernova outbursts (601. Electrospallation
cross sections, which can be related to te relevant neutrino
cross sections by SU(4) symmetry, are a means to test these predictions.
However, the experiments
are quite challenging because extremely small branching ratios are expected for the relevant particle
decay channels.

22

A. Richter / Pmg. Part. Nucl. Phys. 44 (2000) 3-28

Low-multipolarity
magnetic transitions have always been a domain of electron scattering at low momentum trasfers. While previous work mainly focused on Ml excitations 15, lOI], we are now moving
into systematic exploration of the next higher multipol~ity,
M2, with special emphasis on the twist
mode. The new 180 system at the S-DALINAC has proven to be a versatile intrument for the precise exctraction of magnetic strength functions.
One of our goals of the near future are a sytematic
mapping of the twist mode throughout the nuclear lansdscape and a direct proof of its orbital character by the measurement
of selected form factors in heavy nuclei (e.g. 2osPbf. Furthermore,
the
accessible momentum transfer will be increased by developments
of the apparatus, thereby enabling
a first glimpse on M3 modes which form a nearly blank nuclear landscape [102]. E.g., one of the
very few experiments studying M3 strength in the light nucleus 2sMg claims the absence of quenching
in the spin part of the M3 operator [103]. This surprising result certainly needs some independent
examination.
The physics program is closely tied to complementary
investigations
using polarized proton scattering
and/or charge-exchange
reactions at the KVI accelerator in the framework of the EUROSUPERNOVA
collaboration
(Aarhus/Bari/Darmstadt/Gent/Groningen/Milano/M~nster).
The combined results of
electromagnetic
and hadronic probes have been a particularly powerful tool for our understanding
of
the magnetic dipole response in nuclei (think e.g. of the modification by mesonic exchange currents
and isospin degrees of freedom
even in complex nuclei [104-1061 or the decomposion of spin/orbital
[107, 1081) and holds the same promise for higher multipol~ities.
Finally, let me briefly introduce you to another central goal of our experimental
activities at the SDALINAC in the near future: a precision measurement
of the pol~izabilities
of the proton (and the
neutron) using a novel experimental
technique. There is a high interest in these elementary properties
of the nucleon - reflected in several contributions
to this school - providing a clear signature of its
substructure.
Thus, their precise knowledge provides a stringent test of models aiming at a description
of the quark-meson structure of the nucleon such as chiral perturbation
theory [109].
One promising way to determine the polarizabilities
is Compton scattering.
At photon energies well
below the pion mass these can be extracted in a rather model-independent
way from differential cross
sections. Use is made of the low energy theorem

dub, 0) = d&e)
dw
with the structure

dw

-p

(10)

+ 0(ur4)

point

term p

)
= ~(~)(ww)[~(1icose)2+~(I-cose)2]
4*m,

(111

where o and /3 denote the electric and magnetic pol~izabiIities,

respectively.
From Eq. (11) follows
that forward scattering is mainly sensitive to the sum and backward scatttering
to the difference of ~2
and ,f?. Experiments
results (see [109] for a summary) scatter considerably with values a z 10 - 15
fm3 and /3 x O-4 fm3 and total uncertainties
> 1.5 fm3. Recent results come from groups in Saskatoon
[llO] and Mainz (1111, but again with errors larger than 1. low3 fm3.
It is the aim of the experiment planned at the S-DALINAC to achieve uncertainties
better than 0.3
10m3 fm. For this ambitious goal a new experimental
technique is employed, sketched schematically
in Fig. 19. Incident bremsstrahlung
photons with energies E7 = 20 - 100 MeV are scattered from
a hydrogen target and detected in large-volume NaI counters.
Additionally,
the recoil proton is
measured in coincidence allowing a dramatic background suppression
which forms the key to the
envisaged precision. The experiment is also unique in the availability of a tunable cw photon beam
below 50 MeV with sufficient intensity which presently exists nowhere else in the world.
Details of the planned experimental

setup are shown in Fig. 20. Electrons

are converted

to bremsstrahlung

23

A. Richter / Pmg. Part. Nucl. Phys. 44 (2000) 3-28

En = 0.4 - 8.0 MeV

Figure 19: Schematic sketch of a new Compton scattering experiment at the S-DALINAC to measure
the proton (and neutron) polarizabilities
with high precision.
Recoil protons can be measured in
coincidence with the scattered photons leading to a dramatic background suppression.
with a thin (0.1 radiation lengths) converter. A well collimated photon beam impinges on two highpressure (100 bar) hydrogen targets.
These serve as active targets permitting
the measurement
of
recoil protons with multi-anode ionisation chambers. The scattered photons are recorded with large
1Oxll NaI counters placed under 60 and 140. Additional measurements
will be performed at
90 where the structure term, Eq. (ll), is directly proportional
to a. The setup will be installed at
location @ in Fig. 1 where high-energy channeling experiments
were performed so far. First results
are expected in early 2001
@A Lead
EB Polyethylene

Radiator

Magnet

,
Concrete Wall
Figure 20: Setup of the Compton
proton polarieabilities.

scattering

experiment

at the S-DALINAC

planned

to measure

the

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I am very much indebted to my many collaborators
at the S-DALINAC and elsewhere.
I mention in particular P. von Neumann-Cosel,
F. Neumeyer, C. Rangacharyulu,
B. Reitz, G. Schrieder,
K. Schweda, S. Strauch and .I. Wambach for sharing their insight with me into the various topics
presented in this lecture. Furthermore,
P. von Neumann-Cosel
and K. Schweda have not only contributed very much to the physics which I discussed but also helped me in preparing the manuscript
of the lecture. Our longtime collaborator D. Frekers provided the precious and expensive 4sCa target.
Finally, A. Faessler is thanked for creating as usual a very stimulating atmosphere in Erice.

24

A. Richter / Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 44 (2000) 3-28

REFERENCES

[l] A. Richter,

in Proc.

[Z] A. Richter,

Phys. Blitter

[3] D. Bohle,

5th EPAC,

A. Richter,

54 (1998)

H. Kaiser,

Bristol,

1996)

31

W. Steffen,

Phys. Lett. B 137 (1984)

[4] J. Enders,

ed 5. Myers et al. (IOP Publishing,

A.E.L.

Dieperink,

N. LoIudice,

F. Palumbo,

0.

Scholten,

27.

P. von Neumann-Cosel,

C. Rangacharyulu,

A. Richter,

Phys. Rev. C 59

(1999) R1851.
[5] A. Richter,

Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 34 (1995) 261

[6] D. G&y-OdeIin,

S. Stringari,

[7] O.M. Maragb,

S.A. Hopkins,

Phys. Rev. Lett. 83 (1999)

J. Arlt, E. Hodby,

4452

G. Hechenblaikner,

C.J. Foot, Phys. Rev. Lett.,

submitted.
[8] P.F. Bortignon,

A. Bracco,

peratures (Harwood
[9] Topical
[lo]

Conference

J.R. CaIarco,

J. Arruda-Neto,

Schneider,

K.A.

M.R. Yearian,

[11) T. Kihm, K.T. Knopfle,

CaIarco,

Richter,
(1994)

U. Helm,

Tem-

D.H.H.

P. Voruganti,

N. Nomura,

Hoffmann,

B. Neyer, R.E.

G. Fricke,

R. Neuhausen,

179.

H.J. Emrich,

2789.
T. Tamae, M. Sugawara, H. Tsubota,

H. Miyase,

381.

A. Grasmiick,

R. Neuhausen,

S. Schardt,

N. Zimmermann,

J.R.

1667.

J. E. Wise, H. J. Emrich,

Phys. Rev. Lett. 70 (1993)

2872; Phys.

G. Herbert,

V. Huck,

A. Stascheck,

P. von Neumann-Cosel,

A. Stiller, J. Ryckebusch,

C. Rangacharyulu,

J.Carter,

A.

Phys. Rev. Lett.

72

1994.
U. Helm, P. von Neumann-Cosel,

Lett. B 352 (1995)

Bolme,

H. Rothhaas,

L.S.

darevit,

Cardman,

S.E. Williamson,

Miskimen,

S.M. Dolfini,

A. Richter,

G. Schrieder,

and S. Strauch,

Phys.

201.

[17] M. Kohl, P. von Neumann-Cosel,

3167.

[19] R.A.

at Finite

61.

G. Schrieder,

[16] H. Diesener,

[18] G.O.

Structure

Nucl. Phys. A 649 (1999)

S.S. Hanna,

Phys. Rev. Lett. 68 (1992)

J. R. CaIarco,

Rev. C 52 (1995)
[15] H. Diesener,

Griffioen,

H. Riedesel,

H.J. Emrich,

M. Potokar,

[14] J. DeAngeIis,

Varenna,

Phys. Lett. B 146 (1984)

Nucl. Phys. A 489 (1988)

113) J. P. Fritsch,

Nuclear

1998).

Phys. Rev. Lett. 56 (1986)

[12] A. Tanaka, T. Hino, H. Kawahara,

Y. Kawazoe,

Giant Resonances:

Amsterdam,

on Giant Resonances,

Rand, K. Wienhard,

R.K.M.

R.A. Brogha,

Academic,

E.A.

Ammons,

A. Richter,

R. Doerfler,

L.J.

Koester

Phys. Rev. Lett. 61 (1988)

J.D.T.

Arruda-Neto,

A.J. Linzey, 3 .B. MandeviIle,

S.E. Williamson,

G. Schrieder,

S. Strauch,

Jr.,

B.L.

Miller,

C.N.

Papanicolas,

1081.

L.S. Cardman,

B.L. Miller, P.E. Mueller,

Phys. Lett. B 236 (1990)

Phys. Rev. C 57 (1998)

P.L. Cole, J.R. Deininger,

C.N. Papanicolas,

251; Phys. Rev. C 43 (1991)

1677.

A. Ser-

25

A. Richter i Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 44 (2000) 3-25

[20] C. Takakuwa, T. Saito, S. Suzuki, K. Takahisa,
c 50 (1994) 845

T. Tohei, T. Nakagawa,

1211 T. Saito, S. Suzuki, T. Takahisa,

Phys. Rev. Lett. 78 (1997) 1018.

M. Oikawa, T. Tohei, T. Nakagawa,

C. Takakuwa,

[22] C. Bahr, R. Bijttger, H. Klein, P. von Neumann-Cosel,

Strauch, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 411 (1998) 430.
[23] S. Strauch,

in [9], p. 85~

1241 S. Strauch,

Dissertation

1251 I. Hamamoto,

D17, Technische

]27] P.F. Bortignon

V. Klemt,

J. Speth,

J. Speth,

1301 F

Drentje,

Zwarts,
Phys

Darmstadt

K. Schweda, S.

(1998)

Y.I. Assafari,

R.E. PyweII, Nucl. Phys. A 469 (1987) 239.

and R.A. Broglia, Nucl. Phys. A 381 (1981) 405

[29] S. Kamerdzhiev,

Nucl.

Universitit

D. Schmidt,

K. Abe,

H. Sagawa, X.Z. Zhang, Phys. Rev. C 56 (1997) 3121.

[26] G.J. OKeefe, M.N. Thompson,

,281 S. Droidi,

A. Richter,

A. Abe, Phys. Rev.

A.G.

G. Tertychny,
M.N.

A 439 (1985)

Nucl. Phys. A 451 (1986) 11

J. Wambach,
Nucl.

Harakeh,

Phys.

A. van

der

J. Speth,

G. Tertychny,

Phys.

[32] S. Kamerdzhiev,

J. Speth,

G. Tertychny,

J. Wambach,

[33] S. Droidi,

S. Nishizaki,

J. Speth,

[34] R. Martin,

M. Buenerd,

Y. DuPont,

Belote,

H.Y.

[36] R.A.

Eramzhyan,

Chen,
B.S.

Woude,

328

Phys.

Lett.

74 (1995)

3934

B 125B

(1983)

123;

117.

[31] S. Kamerdzhiev,

[35] T.A.

A 624 (1997)

0.

J. Wambach,

Lett.

Phys.

Nucl.
Rep.

M. Chabre,

Nucl.

Phys.

142 (1966)

Hansen,

Ishkanov,

Rev.

L.M.

Rev.

Kapitonov

and

Phys.

V.G.

Phys.

A 577 (1994)

197 (1990)

641

1.

A 185 (1972)

465.

624.
Neudatchin,

Phys. Rep. 136 (1986)

229.
[37] B. S. Dolbilkin, R. L. Kondratev,
V. P. Lisin, S. Khan,
Chenlin Wen, J. Friedrich, 2. Phys. A 331 (1988) 107.

T. Kihm,

K. T. Knopfle,

H. J. Schulz,

!38] P. von Neumann-Cosel,

H. Diesener, U. Helm, G. Herbert, V. Huck, C. Rangacharyulu,
A
Richter, G. Schrieder, A. Stascheck, A. Stiller, J. Ryckebusch, J.Carter,
A.A. Cowley, R.W.
Fearick, 3.5. Lawrie, S.J. Mills, R.T. Newman, J.V. Pilcher, F.D. Smit, Z.Z. Vilakazi, D M.
Whittal, Nucl. Phys. A 569 (1994) 373~.
[39] J. Carter, A.A. Cowley, H. Diesener, R.W. Fearick, S.V. Fijrtsch, M.N. Harakeh, J.J. Lawrie,
S.J. Mills, P. von Neumann-Cosel,
R.T. Newman, J.V. Pilcher, A. Richter, K. Schweda, F.D.
Smit, G.F. Steyn, S. Strauch, D.M. Whittal, Nucl. Phys. A 630 (1998) 631.
[40] K. Schweda et al., to be published
[41] A. van der Woude, in [9], p. 97c.
[42) J. Carter et al., to be published.
[43] P. von Neumann-Cosel,
C. Rangacharyulu,
Phys. Rev. Lett. 78 (1997) 2924.

A. Richter,

G. Schrieder,

A. Stascheck,

S. Strauch,

A. Richter / Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 44 (2000) 3-28

26

[44] J.L. Black, N.W. Tanner,

[45] L. P. Ekstriim,

Phys. Lett. 11 (1964) 135.

J. Lyttkens-Linden,

Nucl. Data Sheets 67 (1992) 579

[46] S. Michaelson, A. Harder, K.P. Lieb, G. Graw, R. Hertenberger,

D. Hofer, P. Schiemenz, E.
Zanotti, H. Lenske, A. Weigel, H.H. Walter, S.J. Robinson, A.P. Williams, Nucl. Phys. A 552
(1993) 232.
[47] A. Stascheck,

Dissertation

D17, Technische

(481 B.L. Berman, J.T. Caldwell,

162 (1967) 1098.
[49] M. Hasinoff,

G.A. Fisher,

[50] K. Shoda, M. Sugawara,

RR.

Hochschule

Darmstadt

(1996).

Harvey, M.A. Kelly, R.L. Bramblett,

S.C. Fultz, Phys. Rev.

S.S. Hanna, Nucl. Phys. A 216 (1973) 221.

T. Saito, H. Miyase, Nuci. Phys. A 221 (1974) 125.

[51] W.R. Dodge, E. Hayward,

E. Wolynec, Phys. Rev. C 28 (1983) 150

[52] J. Reiter, H.L. Harney, Z. Phys. A 337 (1990) 121.

[53] T. Wakasa, H. Sakai, H. Okamura, H. Otsu, S. Fujita, S. Ishida, N. Sakamoto, T. Uesaka, Y.
Satou, M.B. Greenfield, K. Hatanaka, Phys. Rev. C 55 (1997) 2909; Phys. Lett. B 426 (1998)
257.
[54] C. Liittge,

P. von Neumann-Cosel,

155J F. Osterfeld,

F. Neumeyer,

A. Richter,

Nucl. Phys. A 606 (1996) 183.

Rev. Mod. Phys. 64 (1992) 491

[56] F.T. Baker, L. Bimbot, C. Djalali, C. Glashausser, H. Lenske, W.G. Love, M. Morlet, E. TomasiGust&son,
J. van der Wiele, J. Wambach, A. Willis, Phys. Rep. 289 (1997) 235.
(571 Proceedings of the International
Symposium New Facet of Spin Giant Resonances
Eds. H. Sakai et al. (World Scientific, Singapore, 1998).
[58] A. Zaringhalam,
[59] J. Cooperstein,

Nucl. Phys. A 404 (1983) 599.

J. Wambach,

[60] SE. Woosley, D.H. Hartmann,

Nucl. Phys. A 420 (1984) 591.

R.D. Hofmann,

[61] W. Kniipfer, R. l+ey, A. Friebel,

Phys. Lett. B 77 (1978) 367.
(621 V.Yu. Ponomarev,
V.Yu. Ponomarev,

W. Mettner,

W.C. Haxton,
D. Meuer,

Astrophys.
A. Richter,

G. E&art,

E. Spamer,

0. Titze,

J. Speth, J. Wambach,

Z. Phys. A 283 (1977) 219; Nucl. Phys. A 325 (1979) 1.

(651 B. Schwesinger,

K. Pingel,

[SS] B. Schwesinger,

Phys. Rev. C 29 (1984) 1475.

[67] V.Yu. Ponomarev,

J. 356 (1990) 272.

V.G. Soloviev, C. Stoyanov, A.I. Vdovin, Nud. Phys. A 323 (1979) 446;
V.M. Shilov, A.I. Vdovin, V.V. Voronov, Phys. Lett. B 97 (1980) 4.

[63] D. Cha, J. Speth, Phys. Rev. C 29 (1984) 636; D. Cha, B. Schwesinger,

Nucl. Phys. A 430 (1984) 321.
1641 G. Holzwarth,

in Nuclei,

G. Holzwarth,

Nucl. Phys. A 341 (1982) 1

J. Phys. G 10 (1984) L177

1681 P. von Neumann-Cosel,

F. Neumeyer, S. Nishizaki, V.Yu. Ponomarev,
C. Rangacharyulu,
A.
Richter, G. Schrieder, D.I. Sober, T. Waindzoch, J. Wambach, Phys. Rev. Lett. 82 (1999) 1105.

A. Richter / Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 44 (2000) 3-28

21

[69] C. Liittge, C. Hofmann, J. Horn, F. Neumeyer, A. Richter, G. Schrieder, E. Spamer,

D.I. Sober, S.K. Matthews, L.W. Fagg, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 366 (1995) 325.
[70] B. Reitz, F. Hofmann, P. von Neumann-Cosel,
F. Neumeyer, C. Rangacharyulu,
Schrieder, D.I. Sober, B.A. Brown, Phys. Rev. Lett. 82 (1999) 291.
[71] P. von Neumann-Cosel,
[72] P.G. Hansen,
!73] J. Enders,

B. Jonson,

A. Richter,

G.

in [9], p. 77~.
A. Richter,

Nucl. Phys. A518 (1990) 13.

N. Huxel, P. von Neumann-Cosel,

!74] J. Wambach,

A. Stiller,

A. Richter,

Phys. Rev. Lett. 79 (1997) 2010.

Rep. Prog. Phys. 51 (1988) 989.

j75] W. Steffen, H.-D. G&, A. Richter, A. Harting,

Neuhausen, Nucl. Phys. A 404, (1983) 413.
[76] S. Nishizaki,

W. Weise, U. Deutschmann,

G. Lahm,

K.

K. Ando, Prog. Theor. Phys. 71 (1984) 1263.

[77] M. Traini, Phys. Rev. Lett. 41 (1978) 1535

[78] T. Suzuki, Phys. Lett. B 83 (1979) 147.
[79] S. Nishizaki,

K. Ando, Prog. Theor. Phys. 63 (1980) 1599.

[SO] E. Lipparini,

S. Stringari,

181) D. Kurath,

ANL Report

Phys. Rep. 175 (1989) 103.

97/14 (1997) 161

[82] C.M. Ko, V. Koch, G. Li, Annu. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 47 (1997) 505
[83] M. Soyeur, G.E. Brown, M. Rho, Nucl. Phys. A 556 (1993) 355.
(841 G.E. Brown, M. Rho, Phys. Rev. Lett. 66 (1991) 2720.
[85] F. Klingl, N. Kaiser, W. Weise, Nucl. Phys. A 624 (1997) 527.
[86] M.S. Fayache,

L. Zamick, B. Castel, Phys. Rep. 290 (1997) 201.

[87] M.S. Fayache,

(1997) 14.

P. von Neumann-Cosel,

[SS] S. Miiller, G. Kiichler, A. Richter,

Phys. Rev. Lett. 54 (1985) 293.

A. Richter,

Y.Y. Sharon,

L. Zamick, Nucl. Phys. A 627

H.P. Blok, H. Blok, C.W. de Jager, H. de Vries, J. Wambach,

[89] A.M. LaIIena, Phys. Rev. C 48 (1993) 344.

[90] J. Speth, V. Klemt, J. Wambach,

G.E. Brown, Nucl. Phys. A 343 (1980) 382

[91] N.M. Hintz, A.M. LaIIena, A. Sethi, Phys. Rev. C 45 (1992) 1098.
(921 J.E. Wise, J.S. McCarthy, Ft. Altemus, B.E. Norum, RR.
0. Schwentker, Phys. Rev. C 31 (1985) 1699.
1931 T. Hatsuda,

Whitney,

J. Dawson,

S.H. Lee, Phys. Rev. C 46 (1992) R34.

[94] E.J. Stephenson,

J. Liu, A.D. Bather,
S.M. Bowyer, S. Chang,
S.W. Wissink, J. Lisantti, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78 (1997) 1636.
[95] G.F. Bertsch,

J. Heisenberg,

J. Borysowicz,

H. McManus,

C. Olmer,

S.P. Wells,

W.G. Love, Nucl. Phys. A 284 (1977) 399.

28

A. Richter / Pmg, Part. Nucl. Phys. 44 (2000) 3-28

[96] G. Baym, G.E. Brown, Nucl. Phys. A 247 (1975) 395.

[97] S. Kamerdzhiev,
J. Lisantti, P. von Neumann-Cosel,
Phys. Rev. C 55 (1997) 2101.

A. Richter,

G. Tertychny,

J. Wambach.

Davis, U. Garg, W. Reviol, M.N. H arakeh, A. Bather, G.P.A. Berg, C.C. Foster, E.J.
Stephenson, Y. Wang, J. Janecke, K. Pham, D. Roberts, H. Akimune, M. Fujiwara, J. Lisantti,
Phys. Rev. Lett. 79 (1997) 609.

1981 B.F.

[99] W.C. Haxton,

private

communication.

[loo] R. Ramaty,

B. Kozlowsky,

[lOl] A. Richter,

Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 13 (1985) 1.

[102] C. De Coster,

R. Lingenfelter,

K. Heyde, S. Rambouts,

Phys. Today 51 (1998) 30.

A. Richter,

Phys. Rev. C 51 (1995) 3510

[1031 K.K. Seth, R. Soundranayagam,

A. Saha, C. W. de Jager, H. de Vries, B.A. Brown, B.H. Wildenthal, Phys. Rev. Lett. 74 (1995) 642; Erratum 74 (1995) 3306.

[104] A. Richter,

A. Weiss, 0. Hausser,

B.A. Brown, Phys. Rev. Lett. 65 (1990) 2519

[105] C. Liittge, P. von Neumann-Cosel,

F. Neumeyer, C. Rangacharyulu,
A. Richter, G. Schrieder,
E. Spamer, D.I. Sober, S.K. Matthews, B.A. Brown, Phys. Rev. C 53 (1996) 127.
[106] P. von Neumann-Cosel,

A. Richter,

Y. Fujita,

B.D. Anderson,

Phys. Rev. C55 (1997) 532.

[107] Y. Fujita, H. Akimune, I. Daito, M. Fujiwara, M.N. Harakeh, T. Inomata, J. Jinecke, K. Katori,
H. Nakada, S. Nakayama, A. Tamii, M. Tanaka, H. Toyokawa, M. Yosoi, Phys. Lett. B 365 (1996)
29.
[108] Y. Fujita, H. Akimune, I. Daito, M. Fujiwara, M.N. Harakeh, T. Inomata, J. Janecke, K. Katori,
C. Liittge, S. Nakayama, P. von Neumann-Cosel,
A. Richter, A. Tamii, M. Tanaka, H. Toyakawa,
H. Ueno, M. Yosoi. Phys. Rev. C 55 (1997) 1137.
(109) V. Bernard,

N. Kaiser, U.-G. Meissner,

Int. J. Mod. Phys. E 4 (1995) 193.

[llO] B.E. MacGibbon,

G. Garino, M.A. Luca, A.M. Nathan,
C 52 (1995) 2097.
[ill]

J. Ahrends,

private

communication.

G. Feldman,

B. Dolbilkin,

Phys. Rev.