Muonic Hydrogen and the Proton Radius Puzzle

By R. Pohl, R. Gilman, G. Miller, K. Pachucki. 2013

296 citations recorded by the source corpus.

The extremely precise extraction of the proton radius obtained by Pohl et al. from the measured energy difference between the 2P and 2S states of muonic hydrogen disagrees significantly with that extracted from electronic hydrogen or elastic electron–proton scattering. This discrepancy is the proton radius puzzle. In this review, we explain the origins of the puzzle and the reasons for believing it to be very significant. We identify various possible solutions of the puzzle and discuss future research needed to resolve the puzzle.

Subfields: Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics, Nuclear and High Energy Physics, Statistical and Nonlinear Physics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/10cba7a1cd561e2b1f0a4e233c12192a18997b2c

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics

In Nuclear and High Energy Physics

In Statistical and Nonlinear Physics

Citations in the corpus

Galaxies as simple dynamical systems: observational data disfavor dark matter and stochastic star formation (2014, background): “3 But see [3] for a possible indication of new physics at an energy scale > 1 Tev and [4] for indications of physics beyond the standard model based on the proton radius puzzle.”
Highly charged ions: Optical clocks and applications in fundamental physics (2018, methodology): “The situation in the BSQED tests with HCI is akin to that of the laser spectroscopy of hydrogen and the proton-size puzzle (Beyer et al., 2017; Pohl, 2016; Pohl et al., 2010, 2013, 2016): our limited knowledge of the nucleus is the frontier for the most stringent tests of QED.”
Search for New Physics with Atoms and Molecules (2017, background): “The proton radius puzzle, as it is known colloquially, has perplexed the physics community for over half a decade (Carlson, 2015; Hill, 2017; Jentschura, 2011; Pohl, 2016; Pohl et al., 2013).”