2000/05/31 by T. W. Allen, Thomas W. Allen, G. L. Payne +2 · 2 citations
Physics and Astronomy · #Atomic and Molecular Physics #Classical mechanics #Invariant mass #Lorentz transformation #Mathematical physics #Nuclear physics #Nuclear physics research studies #Nucleon #Observable #Operator (biology) #Physics #Quantum Chromodynamics and Particle Interactions #Quantum electrodynamics #Quantum mechanics #Relativistic quantum chemistry #Scattering #nucl-th
paper · pdf · doi:10.1103/physrevc.62.054002
published as Phys.Rev. C62 (2000) 054002 · Revtex 13 pages, 5 figures, corrected some typos
arxiv created 2000/08/02 · openalex publication_date 2000/09/29 · arxiv updated 2009/12/01 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/08/05
We investigate the difference between those relativistic models based on interpreting a realistic nucleon-nucleon interaction as a perturbation of the square of a relativistic mass operator and those models that use the method of Kamada and Gl"ockle to construct an equivalent interaction to add to the relativistic mass operator. Although both models reproduce the phase shifts and binding energy of the corresponding nonrelativistic model, they are not scattering equivalent. The example of elastic electron-deuteron scattering in the one-photon-exchange approximation is used to study the sensitivity of three-body observables to these choices. Our conclusion is that the differences in the predictions of the two models can be understood in terms of the different ways in which the relativistic and nonrelativistic S matrices are related. We argue that the mass squared method is consistent with conventional procedures used to fit the Lorentz-invariant cross section as a function of the laboratory energy.