Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 87 references

Resonant photon scattering in the presence of external fields and its applications for the Gamma Factory

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read A 2-T dipole magnet can cut detected gamma rate to 15 percent and flip its polarization.

desk verdict Solid extension of resonant-scattering theory to Lorentz-boosted fields, with a real but contained fragility: the cooled-beam rate-drop number depends on a near-cancellation of Ca18+ polarizabilities that the paper doesn't bound. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.13863 v3 pith:K4XNIZLL submitted 2025-01-23 physics.acc-ph physics.atom-ph

Jan Richter , Mieczyslaw Witold Krasny , Jan Gilles , Andrey Surzhykov This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.acc-phphysics.atom-ph
keywords resonantphotonscatteringhighlychargedionsGammaFactoryZeemanshiftStarkpolarizationtransferbeamcoolingHe-likecalcium
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper predicts that a modest magnetic field in the collision zone of a storage ring can become a practical control knob for resonant photon scattering by relativistic ions. Because the ions move at Lorentz factor $\gamma_L=2395$, a laboratory field of a few tesla is seen in the ion rest frame as a much stronger magnetic field plus a transverse electric field; these fields shift and split the $1s2p\,^1P_1$ magnetic sublevels of He-like Ca$^{18+}$ through Zeeman and Stark effects. The result is that the detected photon rate, the angular emission pattern, and the Stokes polarization of the scattered light all depend strongly on the applied field: at $B_{\rm lab}=2$ T the normalized detected rate drops to about 0.15 for a cooled beam, and backscattered circularly polarized light converts to nearly complete linear polarization. If this is right, the field becomes a practical actuator for resonance tuning, beam-energy calibration, beam cooling, polarizability measurement, and on-demand polarization control at a Gamma Factory.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the resonant second-order scattering amplitude (Eq. 9) evaluated with external-field-modified ionic energies (Eq. 11) from Zeeman and quadratic Stark shifts. The explicit shift formula (Eq. 15) is the core identity: it expresses each $1s2p\,{}^1P_1$ magnetic sublevel's total shift as a scalar-polarizability term common to all sublevels, a tensor-polarizability term proportional to $3M_\nu^2-2$, and a linear Zeeman term proportional to $M_\nu$, all boosted by the Lorentz factor. Feeding these shifted levels into the density-matrix cross section and Stokes parameters converts a static field into a resonance detuning, a symmetry-breaking agent for angular distributions, and a polarization rotator.

What would settle it

A Gamma Factory proof-of-principle run with a laser-cooled He-like Ca beam could settle it: measuring the detector-normalized count rate and the backscattered Stokes parameters as $B_{\rm lab}$ is swept from 0 to 3 T should reproduce the predicted drop to about 0.15 at 2 T and $P_1\to1$ above 0.5 T; a flat rate curve or unchanged circular polarization would disprove the field-shift mechanism.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the previously studied field-free resonance $1s^2\,{}^1S_0\to 1s2p\,{}^1P_1\to 1s^2\,{}^1S_0$ in He-like calcium becomes field-tunable when the collision zone sits inside a dipole magnet. The paper derives the shifted sublevel energies from Eq. (15), where the quadratic Stark shift is amplified by $\gamma_L^2 v^2 B_{\rm lab}^2$ and the linear Zeeman shift by $g\mu_B\gamma_L B_{\rm lab}$; with the computed scalar and tensor polarizabilities, the $M_\nu=\pm1$ sublevels move out of resonance while the $M_\nu=0$ sublevel stays resonant. This selective detuning, evaluated through the resonant scattering amplitude and density-matrix formalism, explains the numerically observed effects: a drop in the detector-integrated cross section, Hanle-like changes in the angular distribution that survive even after Lorentz focusing into a 1-mrad cone, and conversion of circular into linear polarization of backscattered photons with $P_1$ approaching 1 for $B_{\rm lab}>0.5$ T. The paper presents these as predictions for a Gamma Factory setup, not as measured results.

Load-bearing premise

The quantitative predictions assume the scalar and tensor polarizabilities of the $1s2p\,{}^1P_1$ state of Ca$^{18+}$ computed with the paper's configuration-interaction method, plus $g\approx1$, are accurate; these inputs are benchmarked only against neutral helium, with no stated uncertainty for Ca$^{18+}$.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Scanning $B_{\rm lab}$ at fixed beam energy can replace a 40-step Lorentz-factor scan for finding the resonance, because a 3 T field shifts the excited level by roughly 0.2% of its energy.
  • Measuring the $B$-dependent resonant laser frequency yields a beam-energy calibration at the $10^{-4}$ level, about ten times better than current LHC calibration, and potentially $10^{-5}$ using only the tensor polarizability.
  • A magnetic-field ramp can substitute for the $\gamma_L$ ramp in the laser-cooling scheme, at the cost of being about twice as slow because only the $M_\nu=\pm1$ sublevels contribute to cooling.
  • The Zeeman splitting visible in the resonance profile of a cooled beam provides a real-time monitor of the beam's momentum spread during cooling.
  • The circular-to-linear polarization conversion gives a way to tailor the polarization of the produced gamma beam, which matters for parity-violation studies, vacuum birefringence, and polarized lepton production.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Beyond the paper's own claims, one testable extension is to map the normalized rate versus $B_{\rm lab}$ curve for a beam with controllable momentum spread; the steepness of the drop would directly measure the momentum spread without additional spectroscopy.
  • The same Lorentz-boosted field mechanism should appear in other helium-like ions; comparing two ions with different tensor polarizabilities would isolate the tensor contribution and test the shift formula separately from the resonance-energy calibration.
  • The magnet-field scan could in principle be used as a fast actuator for feedback control of the gamma flux, since the response time is set by the magnet current rather than by re-steering the whole ring.
  • A monoenergetic beam with $\Delta p/p$ below $10^{-5}$ would make the rate drop even sharper, so the effect could serve as a sensitive probe of beam cooling quality.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript develops a density-matrix formalism for resonant elastic photon scattering by ions in static external electric and magnetic fields, treating the field effects as energy shifts of the ionic levels, and applies it to the 1s2 1S0 -> 1s2p 1P1 -> 1s2 1S0 transition in He-like Ca18+ at Gamma Factory parameters. Because a laboratory-frame dipole field is Lorentz-boosted in the ion rest frame, moderate laboratory fields produce strong crossed electric and magnetic fields in the ion frame. The authors compute the detected scattering rate, angular distribution, and Stokes parameters as functions of Blab and beam momentum spread, and discuss applications including resonance tuning, beam-energy calibration, polarizability measurements, beam cooling, and polarization control. The central quantitative findings are a strong suppression of the detected rate with increasing Blab (to about 0.15 of the field-free value for a cooled beam at Blab = 2 T) and a conversion of circular to linear polarization of backscattered light (P1 approaching unity).

Significance. If the quantitative predictions hold, the paper offers a practical theoretical tool for a proposed CERN experiment and several concrete applications, and it goes beyond prior field-free treatments of resonant scattering at the Gamma Factory. The core calculation is based on the standard second-order resonant scattering amplitude and density-matrix framework; the field-free limits correctly reduce to the known analytic expressions of Eqs. (19)-(20); and no parameter is fitted to the predicted curves. Atomic inputs are obtained from the AMBiT code and are benchmarked against neutral He in Table II, with transition energy and lifetime checked against independent literature values. The main weakness is the absence of an uncertainty budget for the Ca18+ polarizabilities, which matters because one headline prediction rests on the near cancellation of the scalar and tensor polarizabilities. The qualitative statement that external fields modify rate, angular pattern, and polarization is robust, but several quantitative claims need a sensitivity analysis before they can be used for experiment planning.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. V A, Eq. (15b), Table II; Sec. V B1 and Fig. 4] The cooled-beam rate drop to about 0.15 at Blab = 2 T is controlled by the Stark shift of the Mν = 0 sublevel, which from Eq. (15b) is proportional to α0(1P1) + α2(1P1). With the Table II values α0 = -2.27e-2 a.u. and α2 = +2.38e-2 a.u., this is a near cancellation of two numbers roughly 20 times larger. A few-percent uncertainty in α2 alone can make the sum vanish or change sign. In the vanishing case, the Mν = 0 channel remains on resonance and carries half of the excitation strength, so the normalized rate would plateau near 0.5 instead of falling to 0.15. The paper validates AMBiT only against neutral He, where no such cancellation occurs, and gives no uncertainty estimate for the Ca18+ polarizabilities. Please provide an uncertainty estimate for α0 and α2, or a robustness scan over their plausible ranges, and show how the curves in Figs. 4, 6, and 9 change. The qualitative field dependence survives, but the specific quantitative claim in Sec. V B1 is not protected without this analysis.
  2. [Sec. VI B2, Eqs. (23)-(24)] The proposed beam-energy calibration method claims a precision improvement to 10^-5, but the calibration formulas are inversely proportional to combinations of polarizabilities; Eq. (24) depends on 1/α2 and Eq. (23) on 1/[(1/4)α2 - (1/2)α0(1P1) + (1/2)α0(1S0)]. No uncertainty propagation is given for these quantities, so the stated precision is not substantiated. Given the near-cancellation noted above for the Mν = 0 shift, the calibration precision should be quantified with a realistic uncertainty in α2 and, for Eq. (23), in the polarizability difference. This is load-bearing for the application claims in Sec. VI.
  3. [Sec. IV A, Eq. (9)] The scattering amplitude uses field-shifted energies but neglects field-induced modifications of the ionic wave functions; the manuscript states this explicitly and argues that the resulting additional magnetic dipole transitions are small. Because the Mν = 0 sublevel can remain near resonance and because the polarization-conversion predictions depend on the coherence of the three Mν channels, a quantitative order-of-magnitude estimate of the neglected wave-function mixing (for example, field-induced mixing with other J = 1 states or with the continuum) is needed to assess the accuracy of the polarization predictions in Figs. 8 and 9. This is not a fatal flaw, but it should be addressed so that the stated approximation is known to be under control for the specific Ca18+ parameters used.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Sec. II] The text contains the typo "thousend" in the paragraph comparing field strengths; it should read "thousand."
  2. [Fig. 11 caption] The caption contains the typo "Calcualtions" and should read "Calculations."
  3. [Eq. (18)] The notation "|1S1, Mi = 0⟩" appears to be a typo; the ground state is |1S0, Mi = 0⟩.
  4. [Sec. V B2] The text refers to a sublevel "|1P1, Mν = ±0⟩"; this should be "Mν = 0." Also, in Table III the entry "10.57 × 10−1" is an awkward notation for 1.057 eV.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: predictions follow from independently calculated polarizabilities and level data, with the field-free benchmark reproduced in-paper.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. The scattering amplitude in Eq. (9) is standard second-order perturbation theory, and the paper explicitly benchmarks its field-free limit: 'for the field-free case, Blab = 0, the result of our calculations perfectly reproduces the analytical expression (20).' The external-field effect enters only through the energy shifts in Eqs. (11) and (15), whose inputs—transition energy, lifetime, g factor, and scalar/tensor polarizabilities—come from independent calculations and measurements: the AMBiT CI results are checked against neutral He in Table II, and the Ca18+ transition energy is compared with measured wavelengths in Section VI B 1. No parameter is fitted to the predicted rates, angular distributions, or Stokes parameters; the B-field dependence of Figs. 4, 7, 8, and 9 follows from these independently supplied shifts. Self-citations to Refs. [5-7] and [49] are not load-bearing: the scattering formalism is reproduced in-paper against the analytic field-free result, and the transition energy is corroborated by measurement. The reader's noted sensitivity of the cooled-beam rate to near-cancellation in alpha0+alpha2 is a robustness or uncertainty issue, not a circularity, because the polarizabilities are external inputs rather than outputs of the predicted curves. Thus no circular step is present.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new entities. The central predictions inherit their scale from polarizability inputs that are computed, not measured, for Ca18+, with no quoted uncertainty; this is the main honest caveat. The scattering formalism and level-shift formulas are standard, imported from the cited literature.

free parameters (3)
  • scalar polarizability alpha0(1P1) of Ca18+ = -2.27e-2 a.u. (AMBiT)
    Sets the common-mode Stark shift in Eq. (15). Not fitted to the scattering data, but its accuracy for Ca18+ is unverified; the paper validates the code only for He.
  • tensor polarizability alpha2(1P1) of Ca18+ = 2.38e-2 a.u. (AMBiT)
    Controls the Mnu-dependent splitting that drives the rate drop and polarization conversion. No uncertainty quoted.
  • scalar polarizability alpha0(1S0) of Ca18+ = 5.67e-5 a.u. (AMBiT)
    Ground-state Stark shift entering Eq. (15); small, so less consequential.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The external fields seen by the ion are the static, uniform Lorentz-transformed fields of Eqs. (3a)-(3b), and the ion trajectory through the dipole magnet is straight.
    Sec. II and Fig. 1. The interaction time in the ion frame (roughly 1.5e-13 s for a 15 cm magnet at gamma=2395) is much longer than the 6e-15 s excited-state lifetime, so a static-field treatment is plausible but not justified in detail.
  • ad hoc to paper External fields affect only the ionic energies, not the wave functions; field-induced state mixing is negligible for the 1S0 to 1P1 E1 transition.
    Sec. IV A, paragraph starting 'One has to note here'. The argument is qualitative: extra M1 transitions are 'much smaller', but no estimate is given.
  • domain assumption The ion beam momentum spread is Gaussian, and the laser is monochromatic in the laboratory frame, giving the Gaussian Doppler profile of Eq. (17).
    Sec. II and Eq. (17). Standard accelerator-physics assumption.
  • standard math Perturbative Zeeman (Eq. 5) and quadratic Stark (Eq. 8) shifts are the complete level-shift mechanism; the quadratic Zeeman effect is negligible.
    Sec. III and Sec. V A. The quadratic Zeeman shift is stated to be about 1e-5 eV versus 0.1 eV for the linear Zeeman shift, and is dropped from Eq. (15).
  • domain assumption Head-on collision with Theta=0 and all photons counter-propagating exactly opposite to the ion velocity.
    Sec. II and Sec. VI A2. The authors note a small Theta affects the scattering negligibly, citing Ref. [5].

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Resonant photon scattering in the presence of external fields and its applications for the Gamma Factory." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/K4XNIZLL

@misc{pith2026250113863,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Resonant photon scattering in the presence of external fields and its applications for the Gamma Factory},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/K4XNIZLL}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.13863}
}
read the original abstract

This theoretical study explores resonant elastic photon scattering in the presence of external electric and magnetic fields, motivated by potential applications in storage ring experiments, such as the Gamma Factory project at CERN. In this framework, resonant scattering involves head-on collisions of relativistic ion beams and counter-propagating laser photons, leading to a strong enhancement of the external field strength due to the Lorentz transformation between ion rest and laboratory frame. Calculations for He-like Ca ions reveal a notable impact of the external fields on the scattering rate as well as the angular distribution and polarization of emitted photons. This opens interesting avenues for diverse applications for the Gamma Factory project, such as as resonance condition tuning, beam cooling, and polarization control.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.13863 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Elastic photon scattering by highly charged ions [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Schematic illustration of the resonant scattering pro [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Schematic illustration of the Zeeman and Stark shift [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (8 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. The normalized cross section of photons scattered [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. The transition energies from the ground state to the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. The normalized cross section of photons scattered [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. The angular distribution of the emitted photons in the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. The three Stokes parameters [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. The three Stokes parameters [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. The relative difference between the resonant value of the Lorentz factor [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11. The cross section of photons scattered in a finite [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_11.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

87 extracted references · 77 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    For the typical parameters of the Gamma Factory, for example, the majority of the photons will be scattered within an opening angle θ(lab) f ≤ 1mrad

    Rate of Scattered Photons Photons resonantly scattered by ultra-relativistic pro- jectiles are emitted in the laboratory frame within a small solid angle around the ion beam propagation di- rection. For the typical parameters of the Gamma Factory, for example, the majority of the photons will be scattered within an opening angle θ(lab) f ≤ 1mrad. Therefor...

  2. [2]

    Thisimpactofthe B-fieldcanalsobeattributedto the mutual shift of the magnetic sublevels|1P1, Mν⟩and is related to the well-known Hanle effect [9, 10, 53, 54]

    Angular Distribution and Polarization Alongside the modified rate of detected photons, which was discussed in the previous subsection, a labo- ratory magnetic field can have a notable impact on the angular and polarization properties of scattered radia- tion. Thisimpactofthe B-fieldcanalsobeattributedto the mutual shift of the magnetic sublevels|1P1, Mν⟩a...

  3. [3]

    Their γL, can span the values between 15 and 3300

    Technological challenges The GF beam test demonstrated that PSI beams can beproduced, collimated, andstoredintheCERN’sLHC and SPS rings [56–58]. Their γL, can span the values between 15 and 3300. In the GF scheme, PSI bunches collide with photon pulses which can be produced with commercially avail- able, low-phase-noise lasers operating in ultraviolet, vi...

  4. [4]

    (22) The Fourier-limited laser-photon bandwidth can be tuned to match, or be smaller than the γL spread of the PSI beam

    Configuration parameters The specific choice of laser, delivering pulses of pho- tons of a small energy band centered at a chosen value of ωlab, the choice of the atomic transition, characterized by the energy difference between the ground state and excited state of the PSIs,ωion, and the angle between the Fabry-Perot cavity and the beam axis,Θ, determine...

  5. [5]

    Resonance condition tuning The energy differences between the excited1s2p 1P1 and the ground state 1s2 1 S0 of He-like PSIs, can be calculated with a precision better than 0.01 % [49]. For the transition in He-like Ca ions, considered in this pa- per, the calculated [49] and the measured [62, 63] values agree within the present measurement errors which ar...

  6. [6]

    Polarization of photons scattered by ultra-relativistic ion beams,

    A. Volotka, D. Samoilenko, S. Fritzsche, V. G. Serbo, and A. Surzhykov, “Polarization of photons scattered by ultra-relativistic ion beams,” Ann. Phys.(Berlin), vol. 534, no. 2100252, 2022

    work page 2022

  7. [7]

    As illustrated in Fig

    LHC beam-energy calibration Once the resonance finding step is finalized, the preci- sion of theγL calibration reflects the present accuracy of calculations of the involved energy levels. As illustrated in Fig. 10 for Li-like Pb and He-like Ca, this results in an uncertainty in the order of10−4. This corresponds to a tenfold improvement in the beam energy...

    1990

  8. [8]

    However, as proposed in Ref

    Measurement of polarizabilities of highly charged ions The calibration procedure described earlier relies on the precise knowledge of the scalar and tensor polariz- abilities of the involved states. However, as proposed in Ref. [20], if these polarizabilities are not known with sufficient accuracy, the method can be turned around to extract these values i...

    work page

Show all 87 references
  1. [9]

    Cooling scheme Laser beam cooling [31–33] is based on the selective excitation of only a fraction of ions stored in the PSI bunches

    Beam cooling and its experimental control a. Cooling scheme Laser beam cooling [31–33] is based on the selective excitation of only a fraction of ions stored in the PSI bunches. By tuning the spectral width of laser-photon pulses such that it is smaller than the PSI ion momen-...

  2. [10]

    units) p/p = 2 × 10 4 p/p = 4 × 10 5 p/p = 1 × 10 5 FIG

    GF photon beam polarization Several domains of the GF experimental program re- quire the precise polarization control of the generated 14 6 × 10 4 2 × 10 4 0 2 × 10 4 6 × 10 4 Relative difference ( L L)/ L 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0Cross section (arb. units) p/p = 2 × 10 4 p/p = ...

  3. [11]

    Elasticscatter- ing ofγ-rays and x-rays by atoms,

    P.Kane, L.Kissel, R.Pratt, andS.Roy, “Elasticscatter- ing ofγ-rays and x-rays by atoms,”Phys. Rep., vol. 140, no. 2, p. 75—159, 1986

    1986

  4. [12]

    Angle-differential cross sections for Rayleigh scattering of highly linearly polarized hard x rays on Au atoms,

    W. Middents, G. Weber, A. Gumberidze, C. Hahn, T. Krings, N. Kurz, P. Pfäfflein, N. Schell, U. Spill- mann, S. Strnat, M. Vockert, A. Volotka, A. Surzhykov, and T. Stöhlker, “Angle-differential cross sections for Rayleigh scattering of highly linearly polarized hard x rays on ...

    2023

  5. [13]

    Polar- ization studies on Rayleigh scattering of hard x rays by closed-shell atoms,

    S. Strnat, V. A. Yerokhin, A. V. Volotka, G. Weber, S. Fritzsche, R. A. Müller, and A. Surzhykov, “Polar- ization studies on Rayleigh scattering of hard x rays by closed-shell atoms,” Phys. Rev. A, vol. 103, p. 012801, Jan 2021

    2021

  6. [14]

    Circular Polarimetry of Hard X-rays with Rayleigh Scattering,

    S. Strnat, J. Sommerfeldt, V. Yerokhin, W. Middents, T. Stöhlker, and A. Surzhykov, “Circular Polarimetry of Hard X-rays with Rayleigh Scattering,”Atoms, vol. 10, no. 4, 2022. 15

    2022

  7. [15]

    Res- onant scattering of plane-wave and twisted photons at the gamma factory,

    V. G. Serbo, A. Surzhykov, and A. Volotka, “Res- onant scattering of plane-wave and twisted photons at the gamma factory,” Ann. Phys.(Berlin), vol. 534, no. 2100199, 2022

    2022

  8. [16]

    Gamma Factory high-intensity muon and positron source: Ex- ploratory studies,

    A. Apyan, M. W. Krasny, and W. Płaczek, “Gamma Factory high-intensity muon and positron source: Ex- ploratory studies,” Phys. Rev. Accel. Beams, vol. 26, no. 8, p. 083401, 2023

    2023

  9. [17]

    Elas- tic photon scattering on hydrogenic atoms near reso- nances,

    D. Samoilenko, A. V. Volotka, and S. Fritzsche, “Elas- tic photon scattering on hydrogenic atoms near reso- nances,” Atoms, vol. 8, no. 2, 2020

    2020

  10. [18]

    An unexpectedly low oscillator strength as the origin of the Fe XVII emission problem,

    S. Bernitt, G. V. Brown, J. K. Rudolph, R. Steinbrügge, A. Graf, M. Leutenegger, S. W. Epp, S. Eberle, K. Ku- biček, V. Mäckel, M. C. Simon, E. Träbert, E. W. Magee, C. Beilmann, N. Hell, S. Schippers, A. Müller, S. M. Kahn, A. Surzhykov, Z. Harman, C. H. Keitel, J. Clementson...

    2012

  11. [19]

    Hanle effect for lifetime de- terminations in the soft x-ray regime,

    M. Togawa, J. Richter, C. Shah, M. Botz, J. Nen- ninger, J. Danisch, J. Goes, S. Kühn, P. Amaro, A. Mo- hamed, Y. Amano, S. Orlando, R. Totani, M. de Si- mone, S.Fritzsche, T. Pfeifer, M.Coreno, A.Surzhykov, and J. R. C. López-Urrutia, “Hanle effect for lifetime de- terminatio...

    2024

  12. [20]

    Hanle effect for lifetime analysis: Li-like ions,

    J. Richter, M. Togawa, J. R. C. López-Urrutia, and A. Surzhykov, “Hanle effect for lifetime analysis: Li-like ions,” arXiv:2412.01509, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Reso- nant elastic soft x-ray scattering,

    J. Fink, E. Schierle, E. Weschke, and J. Geck, “Reso- nant elastic soft x-ray scattering,”Reports on Progress in Physics, vol. 76, p. 056502, apr 2013

    2013

  14. [22]

    The gamma factory proposal for CERN,

    M. W. Krasny, “The gamma factory proposal for CERN,” Executive Summary, arXiv:1511.07794, 2015

    2015 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Summary report of physics beyond colliders at CERN,

    J. Jaeckel, M. Lamont, and C. Vallee, “Summary report of physics beyond colliders at CERN,”Technical Report, arXiv:1902.00260, 2018

    1902 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Observation of Resonances near 11 eV in the Photodetachment Cross Section of theH− Ion,

    H. C. Bryant, B. D. Dieterle, J. Donahue, H. Sharifian, H. Tootoonchi, D. M. Wolfe, P. A. M. Gram, and M. A. Yates-Williams, “Observation of Resonances near 11 eV in the Photodetachment Cross Section of theH− Ion,” Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 38, pp. 228–230, Jan 1977

    1977

  17. [25]

    Effect of an electric field upon resonances in the h− ion,

    P. A. M. Gram, J. C. Pratt, M. A. Yates-Williams, H. C. Bryant, J. Donahue, H. Sharifian, and H. Tootoonchi, “Effect of an electric field upon resonances in the h− ion,” Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 40, pp. 107–111, Jan 1978

    1978

  18. [26]

    Reso- nance photoproduction of pionic atoms at the pro- posed Gamma Factory,

    V. V. Flambaum, J. Jin, and D. Budker, “Reso- nance photoproduction of pionic atoms at the pro- posed Gamma Factory,”Phys. Rev. C, vol. 103, no. 5, p. 054603, 2021

    2021

  19. [27]

    Expanding Nuclear Physics Horizons with the Gamma Factory,

    D. Budker, J. C. Berengut, V. V. Flambaum, M. Gorchtein, J. Jin, F. Karbstein, M. W. Krasny, Y. A. Litvinov, A. Pálffy, V. Pascalutsa, A. Petrenko, A. Surzhykov, P. G. Thirolf, M. Vanderhaeghen, H. A. Weidenmüller, and V. Zelevinsky, “Expanding Nuclear Physics Horizons with th...

    2022

  20. [28]

    Probing Axion-Like-Particles at the CERN Gamma Factory,

    R. Balkin, M. W. Krasny, T. Ma, B. R. Safdi, and Y. Soreq, “Probing Axion-Like-Particles at the CERN Gamma Factory,” Annalen Phys., vol. 534, no. 3, p. 2100222, 2022

    2022

  21. [29]

    Radioactive Ion Beam Production at the Gamma Factory,

    D. Nichita, D. L. Balabanski, P. Constantin, M. W. Krasny, and W. Placzek, “Radioactive Ion Beam Production at the Gamma Factory,” Annalen Phys., vol. 534, no. 3, p. 2100207, 2022

    2022

  22. [30]

    Atomic physics studies at the gamma factory at cern,

    D. Budker, J. R. Crespo López-Urrutia, A. Dere- vianko, V. V. Flambaum, M. W. Krasny, A. Petrenko, S.Pustelny, A.Surzhykov, V.A.Yerokhin, andM.Zolo- torev, “Atomic physics studies at the gamma factory at cern,” Annalen der Physik, vol. 532, no. 8, p. 2000204, 2020

    2020

  23. [31]

    Muon Collider Based on Gamma Factory, FCC-ee and Plasma Target,

    F. Zimmermann, M. Antonelli, A. Blondel, M. Boscolo, J. Farmer, and A. Latina, “Muon Collider Based on Gamma Factory, FCC-ee and Plasma Target,”JACoW, vol. IPAC2022, pp. 1691–1694, 2022

    2022

  24. [32]

    Search Prospect for Extremely Weakly-Interacting ParticlesattheGammaFactory,

    S. Chakraborti, J. L. Feng, J. K. Koga, and M. Valli, “Search Prospect for Extremely Weakly-Interacting ParticlesattheGammaFactory,” PoS,vol.PANIC2021, p. 121, 2022

    2022

  25. [33]

    Vacuum Birefringence at the Gamma Factory,

    F. Karbstein, “Vacuum Birefringence at the Gamma Factory,” Annalen Phys., vol. 534, no. 3, p. 2100137, 2022

    2022

  26. [34]

    Gamma factory searches for extremely weakly interact- ing particles,

    S. Chakraborti, J. L. Feng, J. K. Koga, and M. Valli, “Gamma factory searches for extremely weakly interact- ing particles,” Phys. Rev. D, vol. 104, no. 5, p. 055023, 2021

    2021

  27. [35]

    Local Lorentz In- variance Tests for Photons and Hadrons at the Gamma Factory,

    B. Wojtsekhowski and D. Budker, “Local Lorentz In- variance Tests for Photons and Hadrons at the Gamma Factory,” Annalen Phys., vol. 534, no. 3, p. 2100141, 2022

    2022

  28. [36]

    The hyperfine structure stark effect i. theory,

    J. R. P. Angel, P. G. H. Sandars, and B. Bleaney, “The hyperfine structure stark effect i. theory,”Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A. Mathematical and Physical Sciences, vol. 305, no. 1480, pp. 125–138, 1968

    1968

  29. [37]

    Efficient transmuta- tion of long-lived fission products in a Gamma Fac- tory beam driven advanced nuclear energy system,

    H. Baolong, M. W. Krasny, W. Placzek, Y. Yuan, X. Shi, K. Luo, and W. Luo, “Efficient transmuta- tion of long-lived fission products in a Gamma Fac- tory beam driven advanced nuclear energy system,”Sci. Rep., vol. 15, no. 1, p. 12562, 2025

    2025

  30. [38]

    Observation of doubly excited resonances in the h− ion,

    P. G. Harris, H. C. Bryant, A. H. Mohagheghi, R. A. Reeder, C. Y. Tang, J. B. Donahue, and C. R. Quick, “Observation of doubly excited resonances in the h− ion,” Phys. Rev. A, vol. 42, pp. 6443–6465, Dec 1990

    1990

  31. [39]

    Electric-field effects onh− photodetach- ment partial cross sections above 13.4 ev,

    M. Halka, P. G. Harris, A. H. Mohagheghi, R. A. Reeder, C. Y. Tang, H. C. Bryant, J. B. Donahue, and C. R. Quick, “Electric-field effects onh− photodetach- ment partial cross sections above 13.4 ev,”Phys. Rev. A, vol. 48, pp. 419–426, Jul 1993

    1993

  32. [40]

    Eichler and W

    J. Eichler and W. Meyerhof,Relativistic Atomic Colli- sions. Academic Press, 1995

    1995

  33. [41]

    Cooling rates and intensity limitations for laser-cooled ions at relativistic energies,

    L. Eidam, O. Boine-Frankenheim, and D. Winters, “Cooling rates and intensity limitations for laser-cooled ions at relativistic energies,” Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A, vol. 887, pp. 102–113, 2018

    2018

  34. [42]

    High- luminosity Large Hadron Collider with laser-cooled isoscalar ion beams,

    M. W. Krasny, A. Petrenko, and W. Płaczek, “High- luminosity Large Hadron Collider with laser-cooled isoscalar ion beams,”Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys., vol. 114, p. 103792, 2020

    2020

  35. [43]

    Simulation studies of laser cooling for the Gamma Factory proof- of-principle experiment at the CERN SPS,

    P. Kruyt, D. Gamba, and G. Franchetti, “Simulation studies of laser cooling for the Gamma Factory proof- of-principle experiment at the CERN SPS,” JACoW, vol. IPAC2024, p. MOPS50, 2024

    2024

  36. [44]

    Quadratic zeeman and electric quadrupole shifts in highly charged ions,

    J. Gilles, S. Fritzsche, L. J. Spieß, P. O. Schmidt, and A. Surzhykov, “Quadratic zeeman and electric quadrupole shifts in highly charged ions,” Phys. Rev. 16 A, vol. 110, p. 052812, Nov 2024

    2024

  37. [45]

    Theoretical calcula- tion of the quadratic zeeman shift coefficient of the3P o 0 clock state for strontium optical lattice clock,

    B. Lu, X. Lu, J. Li, and H. Chang, “Theoretical calcula- tion of the quadratic zeeman shift coefficient of the3P o 0 clock state for strontium optical lattice clock,”Chinese Physics B, vol. 31, p. 043101, mar 2022

    2022

  38. [46]

    Polarizabilities of the rydberg states of he- lium,

    Z.-C. Yan, “Polarizabilities of the rydberg states of he- lium,” Phys. Rev. A, vol. 62, p. 052502, Oct 2000

    2000

  39. [47]

    Electric dipole polarizabilities of ryd- berg states of alkali-metal atoms,

    V. A. Yerokhin, S. Y. Buhmann, S. Fritzsche, and A. Surzhykov, “Electric dipole polarizabilities of ryd- berg states of alkali-metal atoms,”Phys. Rev. A, vol. 94, p. 032503, Sep 2016

    2016

  40. [48]

    Photon-polarization effects and their angular dependence in relativistic two-photon bound- bound transitions,

    N. L. Manakov, A. V. Meremianin, A. Maquet, and J. P. J. Carney, “Photon-polarization effects and their angular dependence in relativistic two-photon bound- bound transitions,” Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics, vol. 33, p. 4425, oct 2000

    2000

  41. [49]

    Hanle-zeeman scattering matrix,

    J. O. Stenflo, “Hanle-zeeman scattering matrix,” As- tronomy and Astrophysics, vol. 338, pp. 301–310, 1998

    1998

  42. [50]

    Parity-violation studies with partially stripped ions,

    J. Richter, A. V. Maiorova, A. V. Viatkina, D. Bud- ker, and A. Surzhykov, “Parity-violation studies with partially stripped ions,” Annalen der Physik, vol. 534, no. 3, p. 2100561, 2022

    2022

  43. [51]

    Blum, Density matrix theory and applications; 3rd ed

    K. Blum, Density matrix theory and applications; 3rd ed. Springer series on atomic, optical, and plasma physics, Berlin: Springer, 2012

    2012

  44. [52]

    Quantum electro- dynamic corrections to theg factor of heliump states,

    M. Puchalski and U. D. Jentschura, “Quantum electro- dynamic corrections to theg factor of heliump states,” Phys. Rev. A, vol. 86, p. 022508, Aug 2012

    2012

  45. [53]

    ambit: A programme for high-precision relativistic atomic structure calcula- tions,

    E. Kahl and J. Berengut, “ambit: A programme for high-precision relativistic atomic structure calcula- tions,” Computer Physics Communications, vol. 238, pp. 232–243, 2019

    2019

  46. [54]

    Testing fundamental interactions on the helium atom,

    K. Pachucki, V. c. v. Patkóš, and V. A. Yerokhin, “Testing fundamental interactions on the helium atom,” Phys. Rev. A, vol. 95, p. 062510, Jun 2017

    2017

  47. [55]

    Theoretical deter- mination of the polarizability dispersion and the refractive index of helium,

    M. Puchalski, K. Piszczatowski, J. Komasa, B. Jeziorski, and K. Szalewicz, “Theoretical deter- mination of the polarizability dispersion and the refractive index of helium,” Phys. Rev. A, vol. 93, p. 032515, Mar 2016

    2016

  48. [56]

    Collimation of partially stripped ions in the CERN Large Hadron Collider,

    A. Gorzawski, A. Abramov, R. Bruce, N. Fuster- Martínez, M. Krasny, J. Molson, S. Redaelli, and M. Schaumann, “Collimation of partially stripped ions in the CERN Large Hadron Collider,”Phys. Rev. Accel. Beams, vol. 23, no. 10, p. 101002, 2020

    2020

  49. [57]

    Tensorpolarizabilityofthe 21p1 state of he4 by electric-field level crossing,

    N.D.BhaskarandA.Lurio, “Tensorpolarizabilityofthe 21p1 state of he4 by electric-field level crossing,”Phys. Rev. A, vol. 10, pp. 1685–1699, Nov 1974

    1974

  50. [58]

    High- precision spectroscopy of the forbidden2 3S1 → 2 1P1 transition in quantum degenerate metastable helium,

    R. P. M. J. W. Notermans and W. Vassen, “High- precision spectroscopy of the forbidden2 3S1 → 2 1P1 transition in quantum degenerate metastable helium,” Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 112, p. 253002, Jun 2014

    2014

  51. [59]

    Theoretical En- ergy Levels of 1sns and 1snp States of Helium-Like Ions,

    V. A. Yerokhin and A. Surzhykov, “Theoretical En- ergy Levels of 1sns and 1snp States of Helium-Like Ions,” Journal of Physical and Chemical Reference Data, vol. 48, p. 033104, 08 2019

    2019

  52. [60]

    Energy levels and tran- sition rates for helium-like ions with z=10–36,

    Si, R., Guo, X. L., Wang, K., Li, S., Yan, J., Chen, C. Y., Brage, T., and Zou, Y. M., “Energy levels and tran- sition rates for helium-like ions with z=10–36,”A&A, vol. 592, p. A141, 2016

    2016

  53. [61]

    V. V. Balashov, A. N. Grum-Grzhimailo, and N. M. Kabachnik, Polarization and correlation phenomena in atomic collisions: a practical theory course. Springer Science & Business Media, 2013

    2013

  54. [62]

    Rose, Elementary Theory of Angular Momentum

    M. Rose, Elementary Theory of Angular Momentum. Structure of matter series, Wiley, 1957

    1957

  55. [63]

    Über magnetische beeinflussung der polar- isation der resonanzfluoreszenz,

    W. Hanle, “Über magnetische beeinflussung der polar- isation der resonanzfluoreszenz,”Zeitschrift für Physik, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 93–105, 1924

    1924

  56. [64]

    Hanle effect for monochromatic excitation. non perturbative calculation for a j = 0 to j = 1 transition,

    P. Avan and C. Cohen-Tannoudji, “Hanle effect for monochromatic excitation. non perturbative calculation for a j = 0 to j = 1 transition,” Journal de Physique Lettres, vol. 36, no. 4, p. 85—88, 1975

    1975

  57. [65]

    As a consequence, γL of the beam has to be tuned in a dedicated beam-energy scan to find its optimal value satisfying the resonance con- dition (22)

    at the top LHC beam energy and becomes signifi- cantly larger than the expected theoretical precision of the transition frequency. As a consequence, γL of the beam has to be tuned in a dedicated beam-energy scan to find its optimal value satisfying the resonance con- dition (2...

  58. [66]

    Gamma Factory,

    M. W. Krasny, “Gamma Factory,” inThe Future of the Large Hadron Collider, ch. 21, pp. 297–303

  59. [67]

    First Partially Stripped Ions in the LHC (208Pb 81+),

    M. Schaumann et al., “First Partially Stripped Ions in the LHC (208Pb 81+),” in Proc. 10th Interna- tional Particle Accelerator Conference (IPAC’19), Mel- bourne, Australia, 19-24 May 2019 , no. 10 in In- ternational Particle Accelerator Conference, (Geneva, Switzerland), pp. ...

    2019

  60. [68]

    Relativistic configuration-interaction calculations for the n= 2 states of lithiumlike ions,

    M. Chen, K. Cheng, W. Johnson, and J. Sapirstein, “Relativistic configuration-interaction calculations for the n= 2 states of lithiumlike ions,” Physical Review 17 A, vol. 52, no. 1, p. 266, 1995

    1995

  61. [69]

    Lifetime and Beam Losses Studies of Partially Strip Ions in the SPS (129Xe39+),

    S. Hirlaenderet al., “Lifetime and Beam Losses Studies of Partially Strip Ions in the SPS (129Xe39+),” in 9th International Particle Accelerator Conference, 6 2018

    2018

  62. [70]

    Radiation to electronics studies for CERN gamma factory-proof of principle experiment in SPS,

    G. Mazzola, D. Di Francesca, K. Bilko, L. S. Esposito, R. Garcia Alia, S. Niang, and Y. Dutheil, “Radiation to electronics studies for CERN gamma factory-proof of principle experiment in SPS,”JACoW, vol. IPAC2024, p. TUPC80, 2024

    2024

  63. [71]

    Stable 500 kw average power of in- frared light in a finesse 35000 enhancement cavity,

    X. Y. Lu et al., “Stable 500 kw average power of in- frared light in a finesse 35000 enhancement cavity,” Appl. Phys. Lett., vol. 124, no. 25, p. 251105, 2024

    2024

  64. [72]

    Gamma Factory Proof-of-Principle experiment,

    M. W. Krasny, A. Martens, and Y. Dutheil, “Gamma Factory Proof-of-Principle experiment,” 2019

    2019

  65. [73]

    Measurement of Wave- lengths for Inner-Shell Transitions in CA xvii–xix,

    J. F. Seely and G. A. Doschek, “Measurement of Wave- lengths for Inner-Shell Transitions in CA xvii–xix,”As- trophys. J., vol. 338, p. 567, 1989

    1989

  66. [74]

    X-ray observations of ca19+, ca18+ and satellites from alcator c-mod tokamak plas- mas,

    J. Rice, M. Reinke, J. Ashbourn, C. Gao, M. Victora, M. Chilenski, L. Delgado-Aparicio, N. Howard, A. Hub- bard, J. Hughes, et al., “X-ray observations of ca19+, ca18+ and satellites from alcator c-mod tokamak plas- mas,” Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Op- tical P...

    2014

  67. [75]

    Energy calibration of the SPS with proton and lead ion beams,

    J. Wenninger, G. Arduini, C. Arimatea, T. Bohl, P. Col- lier, and K. Cornelis, “Energy calibration of the SPS with proton and lead ion beams,” Conf. Proc. C, vol. 0505161, p. 1470, 2005

    2005

  68. [76]

    Large Hadron Collider momentum calibration and accuracy,

    E. Todesco and J. Wenninger, “Large Hadron Collider momentum calibration and accuracy,”Phys. Rev. Accel. Beams, vol. 20, no. 8, p. 081003, 2017

    2017

  69. [77]

    Multiconfiguration Dirac-Fock calculations of transition energies with QED corrections in three-electron ions,

    P. Indelicato and J. Desclaux, “Multiconfiguration Dirac-Fock calculations of transition energies with QED corrections in three-electron ions,”Physical Review A, vol. 42, no. 9, p. 5139, 1990

    1990

  70. [78]

    Resonance transition energies of Li-, Na-, and Cu-like ions,

    Y.-K. Kim, D. Baik, P. Indelicato, and J. Desclaux, “Resonance transition energies of Li-, Na-, and Cu-like ions,” Physical Review A, vol. 44, no. 1, p. 148, 1991

    1991

  71. [80]

    Transition rates for lithium-like ions, sodium-like ions, and neu- tral alkali-metal atoms,

    W. Johnson, Z. Liu, and J. Sapirstein, “Transition rates for lithium-like ions, sodium-like ions, and neu- tral alkali-metal atoms,”Atomic Data and Nuclear Data Tables, vol. 64, no. 2, pp. 279–300, 1996

    1996

  72. [81]

    Relativistic recoil, electron-correlation, and QED ef- fects on the 2pj-2s transition energies in Li-like ions,

    Y. Kozhedub, A. Volotka, A. Artemyev, D. Glazov, G. Plunien, V. Shabaev, I. Tupitsyn, and T. Stöhlker, “Relativistic recoil, electron-correlation, and QED ef- fects on the 2pj-2s transition energies in Li-like ions,” Physical Review A—Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics, vo...

    2010

  73. [82]

    S-matrixcalculationsofen- ergy levels of the lithium isoelectronic sequence,

    J.SapirsteinandK.Cheng, “S-matrixcalculationsofen- ergy levels of the lithium isoelectronic sequence,”Physi- cal Review A—Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics, vol. 83, no. 1, p. 012504, 2011

    2011

  74. [83]

    Energy levels of core- excited 1s2l2l′ states in lithium-like ions: Argon to uranium,

    V. Yerokhin and A. Surzhykov, “Energy levels of core- excited 1s2l2l′ states in lithium-like ions: Argon to uranium,” Journal of Physical and Chemical Reference Data, vol. 47, no. 2, 2018

    2018

  75. [84]

    Measurement of the qed en- ergy shift in the1s22p3/2 − −1s22s1/2 x-ray transition in li-like 208Pb79+,

    X. Zhang, N. Nakamura, C. Chen, M. Andersson, Y. Liu, and S. Ohtani, “Measurement of the qed en- ergy shift in the1s22p3/2 − −1s22s1/2 x-ray transition in li-like 208Pb79+,” Phys. Rev. A, vol. 78, p. 032504, Sep 2008

    2008

  76. [85]

    Energy levels of calcium, Ca I through Ca XX,

    J. Sugar and C. Corliss, “Energy levels of calcium, Ca I through Ca XX,” Journal of Physical and Chemical Reference Data, vol. 8, pp. 865–916, 07 1979

    1979

  77. [86]

    Energy Levels of He- and Li-Like Ions (States 1snl, 1 s2nl with n = 2-5),

    L. A. Vainshtein and U. I. Safronova, “Energy Levels of He- and Li-Like Ions (States 1snl, 1 s2nl with n = 2-5),” Physica Scripta, vol. 31, p. 519, jun 1985

    1985

  78. [87]

    Low-energy tests of Delbrück scattering,

    J. Sommerfeldt, S. Strnat, V. A. Yerokhin, W. Mid- dents, T. Stöhlker, and A. Surzhykov, “Low-energy tests of Delbrück scattering,” Phys. Rev. A, vol. 108, p. 042819, Oct 2023

    2023

  79. [2019]

    https://doi.org/10.18429/JACoW-IPAC2019- MOPRB055

    doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.