You are on page 1of 9

(To be submitted

to Phys. Rev. Letters)

A TEST OF QUANTUM ELECTRODYNAMICS BY ELECTRON-ELECTRON SCATTERING* W. C. Barber+, B. Gittelman' Stanford Stanford, , G. K. O'Neill', University California and B. Richter -k+*


Work supported

by the U. S. Office [AT(&-3)-5151.

of Naval Research under contracts The initial part of the work

[Nonr 225(67)1 and [Nonr 1.858(39)1 and the U. S, Atomic Energy
Commission contract was supported t * ** by the joint program of the Office Stanford of Naval Research Stanford, Princeton, California. New Jersey,

and the U. S. Atomic Energy Commission. High Energy Physics Palmer Physical (Internal Stanford California. (Distribution of this document is unlimited). Linear Laboratory, University, Laboratory, Accelerator Princeton Center, University, Stanford

code: 245-6011). University, Stanford,

and camera re- by 5 minutes At the start beams were 30 to 60 ma. O'Neill*. injection. . soft chamber. the walls and angles but 400 events were rejected electrons striking all fiducials or longitudinally.438 SLAC-PUE-194 APRIL 1966 A TEST OF QUANTUM ELECTRODYNAMICS BY ELECTRON-ELECTRON SCATTERING* ** and B. C. and operation The Stanford Mark III of 300 MeV.3. For such events the source-point coordinates .000 of rejection incident The veto system a similar cosmic rays. information. letter scattering reports at a total by a colliding-beam the final technique analysis cross-section using storage rings for electronThis energy of 600 MeV in the center-of-mass rings 1.5+6+7+81-9tlO) were obtained background For 38 of these hours the beams were displaced. of absorbers and counterswas l$ of 300 MeV electrons thousand measured to veto on less than The four spark chambers from below. scanned twice.3 . The detection provided a factor arrangement were triggered Thirty time. Stanford.or either The film as clearly vertically was due to 1.I HEPL .(any two of 1. in 174 hours of counter-on on the signature photographs to provide and all (. A typical loading.minutes.2. with a mean storage time of 3O. Richter W. of data-taking followed camera unloading. which then circulated in the rings at the same -a in a vacuum of 10 torr. Barbert. Stanford University.5. showers from spill-out A typical of the vacuum of the tracks event satisfying is shown in Fig. electrons energy. G. California We have measured the differential electron system. K.2. 4). counting for cycle consisted of each cycle of 20 minutes electron the electron 1. of the storage linear accelerator The parameters described3'4. B. Gittelman* . - apparatus is shown in Fig. have been supplied of the data. against 3.

each bin the total -2- . columns number of observed events and the Comparison of the results 2 and 3 give for *where the data have been grouped in 5 degree bins. transverse rings. therefore muons. (4:) (1+6) . longitudinal seconds. as correction calculated by Tsai 7 D with the theory is shown in Table I. systematic errors degree both in the upper and the lower chambers. of the source region ing angle.I in the upper and lower chambers were measured independently. within or non-interacting. that and for the principal distribution no beams in the storage background The observed angular 6 modified formula was compared with the Mbller by a Feynman regulator and by a radiative +y where S2 = 4E2 . Gk(a2) = 4 90 4 G. In Table I. for beams interanalysis The number of events per hour with was the same. for outside for analysis out of 400 (see Table I). . and 6 q2 = -4~*cos~0/2 0 the radiative . varied The circulating distribution. A correction electron with The fiducial The length of scatterof 2 nano- in angle measurement were found to be less than l/2 from 5 cm to 10 cm as a function beams were nearly full-widths at half-maximum Gaussian in was made for the variation distribution was 19 events statistical in source density beams. was We due to the longitudinal The background fiducials acting conclude cosmic-ray scattering correction: of the circulating source points errors. is q2 = -4E2 sin2612 1 1-c K: .

72 GeV/c corresponding to a limit on K -1 imaginary. K > 1.030 2 0. By a statistical -2 which is larger than for this choice results in a "best valuetl of K The maximum likelihood calculation shows any other choice of bin size. -2 varies by less than 0. Column 4 is the Mbller cross section correction where of l/S r'. K result for our detector if bins and given a maximum and subtractions errors made in of the 400 of the corrections The data were grouped in 1 degree angular All the data analysis were smaller than the statistical of K-2 events observed.) Column 6 i s a correction includes resulting theoretically likelihood the radiative from fiducial expected analysis.18 F = 1. In making the preliminary analysis the events 2) 5 bins were divided accident of 10 degrees each. -1 for real K of 0.1 GeV/c (one standard deviation) K-l < 0. The maximum likelihood is value from the data at 600 MeV(CMS) -1 The limit of K is K-2 = + 0. correction as well as geometrical corrections Column 7 gives the normalized conditions.14 cm. into the collinearity of the tracks and lower chambers as tightly were extra spill at the smaller in the preliminary analysis which were condenThe extra events could have come from angles. -3- . K < 0.032 ~~ . A preliminary -2 a of the same data gave .001 i 0. K > 0.76 GeV/c (95% confidence). to the Mbller cross section which chambers. and of .28 F .background in units conditions for the cut off to be subtracted.6 x lo. (one standard deviation).05 F for K -2 from the preliminary The difference in the best values of K analysis and final analysis there trated electron analyses comes mainly from two sources: as the final analysis 1) did.26 F = 2.8 X 10 cm.K = 0. The preliminary in the upper As a result did not restrict events out. K > 0.033 F2 -1 -11. -2 = 0.002 F2 for a bin that the best value of K size of 3 degrees or less. (rn/E)=l S Column 5 is the radiative energy and angle were determined by our experimental (30 MeV minimum final electron energy and 10 degrees maximum L@ unless a track was within 10' of the edge of the detection LB is the angle between the tracks in the upper and lower region.

group at both universities storage and of the detection -4- .8 GeV (95% confidence) the experiment in sensitivity to our result. experiment electron provided It is.The experiment in the center-of-mass One should propagator. Panofsky and the Physics for encouraging and technicians of our in construction of the of Princeton and Stanford Universities and the engineers experiment. with larger detector solid angle. et al experiment is sensitive to the photon not in direct contradiction to the of Blumenthal propagator. for their great effort equipment. 9 . could occur in a number of ways. is currently this being extended to 1100 MeV total system. H. which is sensitive ratio mainly to the Measurement of the anomalous gyromagnetic a sensitive test A breakdown of the theory muon moment is analyzed Feynman form. It this which is comparable is a pleasure collaborative rings Departments of the muon has at small distances the of quantum electrodynamics 10 . K. to thank Professor W. energy note that therefore. but if using a cut off on the photon propagator of the 10 gives a limit K > 0.

Y. 1033. Rev. 269 (1960). R. Washington.. C. International on High-Energy Lanzerotti. Italy. C. 4. J. Physik 14. S. L. Accelerator Princeton Center.C. G. 660 (1965). Barber. Sot. 1957.58(39)] and the U. Garwin. 1965. HEPL Report No. 170. Phys. 1. F. Richter. W. Accelerators B. Princeton. K. 9. W. 1241 (1965). Am. O'Neill G. a. Atomic Energy Commission. M. Letters Nuovo Cimento 37. G. Ball. Rev. p. 125. of Naval Research Stanford. K. Geneva. University. University. p. Sens. Laboratory. on High Energy Conferencej 3. Muller. W. 10. Proceedings Proceedings D. CalifNew Commission contract and the U. Office [AT(&-$5151. ings Fifth Frascati. Phys. 14. Zichichi. S. USAECNYO-8015. Panofsky and June 1959. 531 (1932). (Internal Linear Laboratory. S. July II. 'Richter. 5. s. Gittelman. H. 2. G. B. of Naval Research under contracts The initial part of the work and [Nonr 18. B. K. University. K. K. Tsai. Conference Accelerator CERN. O'Neill. A. Charpak. Mbller. C. -5- . Proceed-Acceleratorsg and Stairs. 170 (1958). Atomic Energy by the joint program of the Office Stanford University. Ann. Palmer Physical Jersey Stanford California. O'Neill. Barber. G.REFERENCES * Work supported [Nonr 225(67)1 was supported by the U. Bulletin B. A. Faissler. Stanford International of the Particle and Instrumentation. K. 6. Blumenthal. S. t * ** High Energy Physics ornia. Gittelman. O'Neill. and J. Stanford. C. Pipkin. J. T. 1959. G. 3 No. and B. 7. Ehn. Stanford code: 2456011). Phys. 1965. Farley. 3. Gittelman. O'Neill Conference Joseph.

.75 33.5 .041 ! i i i 0..58 32. ...8 1._.7345 0.-.057 0.7 2.07 27.. ii E 40-45 45-50 50-55 55-60 60-65 65-70 70-75 75-80 80-85 8% 90 75 65 36 45 32 36 29 23 21 0. .. 9287 74.5 2.50 1 Total: -.36 27. .81 16. og 1 . --.055 0._ .051 0.-___-_ 1 I_ I i I .1 t I i f 1.048 0._..84 18 380 .TABLJ3 I Comparison of the Observed Angular II _c_____.0048 1. .6189 0. 96x3 1.36 42..52 ___ I ----.053 I i 0.94 21.86 57.5 18. _.-_ 0.0563 1.9 i i i ! 120.44 18.4 1..2 2._ _.--_-.--- with that _ _ ----G(Q > 0.i.09 j 1 .40 38.064 o..055 0...045 0.-... i j 442.18 23. --..- I i . 23.59 lg. _.054 i I 20. .-. Distribution -2 Expected from Theory if K = 0.... 1.55 80.8264 0. 18. _...80 361.----.I 2. ~.6 0._.__.0368 1.-.9021) ! \ i 1 3 8 (degrees) -‘Tbkg j g (%K-2=O) : - S(e) \ ..0515 o.. 0. ...8 2.3.61 59039 47._.

apparatus showing sparks from a real . 1 Configuration of the detection event.FIGURE CAPTION Fig.