Photon vortex generation in quantum level by high-order harmonic synchrotron radiations from spiral moving electrons in magnetic fields

Myung-Ki Cheoun; Takehito Hayakawa; Tomoyuki Maruyama; Toshitaka Kajino

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 45 references

Photon vortex generation in quantum level by high-order harmonic synchrotron radiations from spiral moving electrons in magnetic fields

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper predicts that each harmonic of synchrotron radiation from an electron in a magnetic field is a photon vortex whose z-component of total angular momentum equals the harmonic number.

desk verdict Quantum Landau-level derivation gives the harmonic-order/zTAM link fresh support, but a gauge-violating photon mode and an asserted K identification keep the quantitative vortex-dominance claim from landing. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.11545 v3 pith:FF42Z4VP submitted 2019-08-30 astro-ph.HE nucl-thphysics.opticsquant-ph

Tomoyuki Maruyama , Takehito Hayakawa , Toshitaka Kajino , Myung-Ki Cheoun This is my paper · ORCID

classification astro-ph.HEnucl-thphysics.opticsquant-ph PACS 41.60.-m42.50.Tx97.60.Jd

keywords photonvortexsynchrotronradiationLandauquantizationtotalangularmomentumBesselbeammagnetarharmonicgamma-raydetection

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

The paper presents a quantum treatment of synchrotron radiation from an electron in a uniform magnetic field, using Landau quantization (the quantization of electron orbits in the field). It claims that the photon emitted in the m-th harmonic is a Bessel vortex—a photon whose wavefunction winds around the propagation axis—with z-component of total angular momentum exactly equal to m. The authors calculate the decay widths and energy spectra of these photons for magnetic field strengths of $10^{12}$ to $10^{13}$ G, the range found in magnetars. The result implies that photon vortices should be copiously produced in strongly magnetized astrophysical objects and could be measured with existing or proposed gamma-ray detectors. A sympathetic reader would care because this turns what has been a laser-optics phenomenon into a predicted, widespread quantum process in the universe.

What carries the argument

The central object is the photon wavefunction constructed from Bessel functions, combined with a longitudinal component so that it satisfies the gauge condition in the paraxial limit; two independent states, labeled state-1 and state-2, are formed from helicity combinations. The load-bearing identity is the conservation law $K = J_i - J_f$ for the z-component of total angular momentum, together with the correspondence $K =$ harmonic order adopted from the classical result. The electron wavefunctions are Landau states with Laguerre-function radial profiles; the node number n determines the axis of the helical motion, and the initial state is taken at n=0 to describe spiral motion along the z-axis, while final states with n at least 1 represent recoil with a shifted axis. Decay widths are obtained from the imaginary part of the electron self-energy, which gives the radiative transition rate to each final Landau state.

What would settle it

Measure the transverse phase or orbital angular momentum of synchrotron photons from a single electron in a known magnetic field: the $K=2$ mode must vanish on the axis and show a full $2\pi$ phase winding, while the $K=1$ mode must peak on the axis; a result that violates these expectations would disprove the vortex identification.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

In this quantum treatment, an electron in a uniform magnetic field along the z-axis is described by Landau states carrying a good z-component of total angular momentum J. When the electron makes a transition to a lower Landau level, the emitted photon's wavefunction is shown to be a Bessel vortex, an eigenstate of the z-component of total angular momentum K, with K equal to the difference of the initial and final electron angular momenta. The paper identifies this K with the classical harmonic order: the $K=1$ mode has a central component and loses the vortex character, while modes with K = 2 and higher have a helical phase structure and zero amplitude on the axis. From these wavefunctions the paper computes decay widths and energy spectra, and finds that the fraction of high-K vortex modes increases with magnetic field strength and with the initial electron angular momentum, so that at $10^{13}$ G photon vortices dominate. The calculation also yields a discontinuity in the photon energy spectrum, traced to the $K=1$ constant component with $q_T = 0$, and predicts low circular polarization because the dominant photon state contains nearly equal helicity admixtures.

Load-bearing premise

The central claim depends on the constructed Bessel photon wavefunction being the true emitted state, even though it is gauge-consistent only for photons moving nearly parallel to the magnetic field, and on identifying the quantum number K with the classical harmonic order by comparison with a classical calculation rather than by derivation.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Each photon in the m-th harmonic is a vortex carrying m units of z-component of total angular momentum, so high-harmonic synchrotron radiation is a natural source of photons with large angular momenta.
At magnetar-strength fields around $10^{13}$ G, the computed decay widths make photon vortices the dominant emission mode rather than a rare correction.
The photon energy spectrum at $B = 10^{13}$ G should exhibit a sharp discontinuity at $q_z$ about 4.1 MeV/c, a feature that could be searched for in astrophysical spectra.
Because the emitted photons are Bessel vortices, Compton-scattering detectors could in principle measure their angular momentum and thereby observe astrophysical vortex photons.
The presence of these vortex states in strong fields modifies radiative transitions and, as the paper notes, can affect stellar nucleosynthesis in magnetized environments.

Reading between the lines

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

An extension the authors leave implicit: if K equals the harmonic order exactly, then measuring the orbital angular momentum of a synchrotron photon gives a direct measurement of the harmonic order, turning a vortex-sensitive detector into a harmonic spectrometer for astrophysical sources.
The same Landau-transition mechanism should apply to positrons and other charged leptons, so pair-rich pulsar magnetospheres may also emit photon vortices; this follows from the same conservation law but is not calculated in the paper.
The predicted low circular polarization combined with the vortex phase structure implies a correlation between polarization and transverse position; an instrument sensitive to both could distinguish vortex emission from plane-wave emission without resolving the beam.
The zTAM conservation $K = J_i - J_f$ is exact even if the paraxial construction of the photon state is approximate, so the vortex nature of the radiation is likely robust, although the precise radial profile and the harmonic-order correspondence could be modified by a non-paraxial treatment.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

You should know two things before spending time on this: the paper is a genuine quantum complement to Katoh's classical result, and the mode construction at its core is not clean enough to carry the quantitative claim.

What's new and good: the authors actually do a Landau-quantized transition calculation, produce explicit Bessel photon wave functions, and compute decay widths per final electron state for B = 10^12–10^13 G. That is a real step beyond the classical angular-momentum ratio argument in Ref. [17]. The qualitative point that the k-th harmonic carries zTAM k is consistent with prior classical work, and the paper says so honestly. The final-state recoil handling is a nice addition.

Now the soft spots, in order of severity. First, the stress-test check on Eq. (6) holds up: state-1 does not satisfy the Coulomb gauge that the paper states it is using. With the components as written, ∇·A is proportional to q_z q_T J_K, not zero. The paper admits the paraxial limit issue, but the actual violation is exact, not merely large-q_T. That means the decay widths in Figs. 3–4 mix an unphysical longitudinal component, so the numbers—including the claim that vortices dominate at 10^13 G—are not gauge-invariant. The authors need to either construct a properly transverse vortex basis or show that the unphysical component cancels in the decay sum; they do neither. Second, the identification of K with harmonic order is asserted by matching the classical result, not derived from the quantum matrix element. The zTAM conservation K = J_i − J_f is solid, but showing that K also labels the harmonic requires checking that the radiated power peaks at frequencies where the photon energy equals the classical harmonic spacing times the fundamental. That check is missing. Third, Eq. (10) is stated without derivation, though the structure is plausible. Fourth, the numerics have no convergence checks, no comparison with the classical spectrum as a baseline, and the discontinuity at 4.1 MeV is explained but not shown to be physical rather than an artifact of the truncated mode set.

None of this kills the project, but the central quantitative claim needs repair. The paper is worth a serious referee because the quantum framework is useful and the astrophysical implication is interesting; it should be major revision, not desk reject. I'd send it back primarily on the gauge issue and the missing harmonic-order derivation.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript studies photon emission from an electron in a Landau level in a uniform magnetic field and claims that each photon in the k-th harmonic of synchrotron radiation is a Bessel vortex with a z-component of total angular momentum equal to k. The authors construct photon wave functions in terms of Bessel modes, compute decay widths and energy spectra for magnetic fields of 10^12-10^13 G, and conclude that photon vortices are predominantly produced in magnetar-like astrophysical environments.

Significance. If the central claim were established, the paper would provide a quantum-level description of vortex photon generation in synchrotron radiation and would extend the classical result of Katoh et al. to individual photons, with consequences for astrophysical polarimetry and proposed vortex-photon detectors. The authors should be credited for attempting a genuine Landau-quantization calculation and for including electron recoil through final states with n_f >= 1. However, the photon-mode construction, which is the foundation of the quantitative results, is not a valid Coulomb-gauge solution, and the connection between the quantum number K and the classical harmonic order is asserted rather than derived. These issues are load-bearing for the main claims.

major comments (3)

[Photon wave function, Eq. (6)] State-1 does not satisfy the Coulomb gauge. A direct calculation using the Bessel recurrence relations gives a divergence proportional to i q_z q_T J_K(...) e^{iK phi} e^{i q_z z}, which is nonzero for generic q_T and q_z. This is not merely a paraxial-limit failure: the mode is nontransverse except for special kinematic cases. Since the paper states that the calculation uses the Coulomb gauge, the mode A^(1)_K contains a longitudinal unphysical component, and summing both states in Eqs. (8)-(10) overcounts degrees of freedom. The resulting decay widths in Figs. 3-4 are therefore not gauge-invariant, and the quantitative claim that photon vortices dominate at B=10^13 G is unsupported.
[Eq. (6), Bessel argument] The argument of the Bessel functions in Eq. (6) is written as sqrt(eB) q_T r_T, which has dimensions of energy in natural units and is therefore not a valid argument of a mathematical Bessel function. In addition, a free-photon wave function should not depend on the external magnetic field B. If this is a typographical error and the argument should be q_T r_T, then the numerical matrix elements in Eqs. (8)-(10) and the figures need to be recomputed; if it is not a typo, the mode construction is internally inconsistent.
[After Eq. (6), harmonic-order identification] The paper states that radiation with K >= 2 corresponds to the K-th harmonic, but this identification is not derived in the quantum calculation. The equality K = L + h defines the z-component of total angular momentum of the photon; it does not by itself imply that the emitted frequency is K times the fundamental cyclotron frequency. No calculation shows that the transition amplitude for fixed K peaks at the classical harmonic frequency omega_K = K Omega_c or reproduces the classical harmonic spectrum. Since the abstract and conclusions claim that the k-th harmonic photon has zTAM k, this missing step is central and should be supplied by an explicit comparison with the classical synchrotron spectrum.

minor comments (4)

[Abstract and throughout] There are typos such as 'vortecies', 'para-axial', and 'discontinue', and the notation J_tilde_M is used before it is defined; Eq. (4) also calls J_L an 'associated Bessel function', which is inaccurate.
[Fig. 3 caption] The caption lists dashed and dotted lines for state-1 and state-2, but the text says that state-1 dominates for all modes; please clarify whether the plotted curves for a given final n_f are summed over K or shown per K, and define 'dominates' quantitatively.
[Fig. 4] The discontinuity at q_z = 4.1 MeV/c is attributed to the K=1 constant decay width from J_0(0)=1; an analytic derivation of this term would help the reader assess whether it is physical or an artifact of the incomplete mode set.
[Conclusions, astrophysical claim] The conclusion that photon vortices are predominantly generated in magnetars and GRB jets is stronger than the presented single-electron transition rates; a treatment of Landau-level populations and radiative transfer would be needed before such astrophysical statements can be inferred.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the calculation is a forward quantum derivation with no fitted parameters, and the Bessel-mode expansion is a basis choice rather than a circular input.

full rationale

The derivation is self-contained: electron Landau states (Eq. 3), photon Bessel modes (Eqs. 4-6), and transition matrix elements (Eqs. 8-10) are defined independently, and the decay widths are computed by direct integration without fitting any parameter to data. The statement that an emitted photon carries zTAM K follows from angular-momentum conservation in the matrix element, and the association of K with the classical harmonic number is an external consistency check against Katoh et al., not a circular input. Self-citations (Refs. [6], [31], [37]) appear only in contexts such as measurement proposals or prior astrophysical estimates and are not load-bearing for the central claim. The gauge non-transversality of the state-1 mode is a correctness concern, not a circularity, because it does not make the conclusion equivalent to the assumptions by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The calculation uses standard QED in an external magnetic field. No parameters are fitted to data. The main inputs are the Landau-quantized electron states and a Bessel-photon ansatz; the latter is a domain assumption for the photon state, and the harmonic assignment is adopted from classical results. No new particles, forces, or dimensions are introduced.

assumptions (4)

domain assumption Landau quantization with the Dirac equation describes the electron states in a uniform magnetic field.
The electron wave function in Eq. (3) is derived from the Dirac equation with the symmetry gauge, a standard formalism for charged particles in magnetic fields.
ad hoc to paper The emitted photon wave function is a solution of the Klein-Gordon equation in the Coulomb gauge, patched with a longitudinal component to satisfy the gauge condition.
Eq. (4) does not satisfy the gauge condition except in the paraxial limit; the authors introduce the state-1/state-2 combination in Eqs. (5)-(6) without proving it is the exact vortex eigenstate outside that limit.
ad hoc to paper The quantum number K = L + h of the emitted photon labels the harmonic order of the classical synchrotron radiation.
The paper states that radiation for K = 1 corresponds to the fundamental radiation and K >= 2 to the K-th harmonic, citing the classical result of Ref. [17]. This identification is not derived from the quantum calculation.
domain assumption The initial electron state is restricted to the lowest radial node number n_i = 0.
The paper states: 'we consider various node numbers for the final state and take only n = 0 for the initial state.' This restricts the initial state to a helical motion along the z-axis.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Photon vortex generation in quantum level by high-order harmonic synchrotron radiations from spiral moving electrons in magnetic fields." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/FF42Z4VP

@misc{pith2026190811545,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Photon vortex generation in quantum level by high-order harmonic synchrotron radiations from spiral moving electrons in magnetic fields},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/FF42Z4VP}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.11545}
}

read the original abstract

We explore photon vortex generation in synchrotron radiations from a spiral moving electron under a uniform magnetic field along z-axis using Landau quantization. The obtained wave-function of the photon vortecies is the eigen-state of the z-component of the total angular momentum (zTAM). In m-th harmonic radiations, individual photons are the eigen-state of zTAM of m. This is consistent with previous studies. Using the presently obtained wave-functions we calculate the decay widths and the energy spectra under extremely strong magnetic fields of 10^12 - 10^13 G, which are observed in astrophysical objects such as magnetized neutron stars and jets and accretion disks around black holes. The result suggests that photon vortices are predominantly generated in such objects. Although they have no coherency it is expected that photon vortices from the universe are measured using a detector based upon a quantum effect in future. This effect also affects to stellar nucleosynthesis in strong magnetic fields.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.11545 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** FIG. 2. The squared amplitudes of the initial and final electrons, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** FIG. 3. Decay widths of electrons with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_3.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (1 more)

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: FIG. 4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

45 extracted references · 41 canonical work pages

[17]

Afanasev, V

A. Afanasev, V. S. Serbo, and M. Solyanik, J. Phys. G. Nucl. Pa rt. Phys. 45, 055102 (2017)

work page 2017
[1]

The in itial and ﬁnal electron orbitals have annual structures and their amplitudes at the center ar e zero

and the radiative photon as a function of the radius. The in itial and ﬁnal electron orbitals have annual structures and their amplitudes at the center ar e zero. The diameter of the electron motion decreases after a photon emission, because of the los s of the total angular momentum and energy. For the radiation for K = 1, the wave-function has the peak ...

work page
[2]

Allen, M

L. Allen, M. W. Beijersbergen, R. J. C. Spreeuw, and J. P. Woerd man, Phys. Rev. A 45, 8185 (1992)

work page 1992
[3]

U. D. Jentschura and V. G. Serbo, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 013001 (2011)

2011
[4]

Petrillo, G

V. Petrillo, G. Dattoli, I. Drebot, and F. Nguyen, Phys. Rev. Let t. 117, 123903 (2016)

work page 2016
[5]

J. A. Sherwin, Phys. Rev. A 95, 052101 (2017)

work page 2017
[6]

A. A. Peshkov, A. V. Volotka, A. Surzhykov, and S. Fritzsche, Phys. Rev. A 97, 023802 (2018)

work page 2018
[7]

Maruyama, T

T. Maruyama, T. Hayakawa, and T. Kajino, Sci. Rep. 9, 51 (2019). 10 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 γz Γ e (eV) nf = 0 nf = 1 nf = 2 nf = 3 (a)B = 1013 G Li = 10 0 10 20 30 40(c)B = 1013 G Li = 100 0 2 4 6 8 10 0 2 4 6 8 10 K γz Γ e (eV) State-1 State-2 Total (b)B = 1012 G Li = 10 0 10 20 30 40 50 0 2 4 6 8 10 K (d)B = 1012 G Li = 100 FIG. 3. Decay widths of electr...

work page 2019

Show all 45 references

[8]

Wang, J.-Y

J. Wang, J.-Y. Yang, I. M. Fazal, N. Ahmed, Y. Yan, H. Huang, Y. Ren, Y. Yue, S. Dolinar, M. Tur, and A. E. Willner, Nature Phot. 6, 488 (2012)

2012
[9]

Toyoda, F

K. Toyoda, F. Takahashi, S. Takizawa, Y. Tokizane, K. Miyamoto , R. Morita, and T. Omatsu, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 143603 (2013)

2013
[10]

E. V. Kovlakov, I. B. Bobrov, S. S. Straupe, and S. P. Kulik, Phy s. Rev. Lett. 118, 030503 (2017)

2017
[11]

H. He, M. E. J. Friese, N. R. Heckenberg, and H. Rubinsztein-D unlop, Phys. Rev. Lett. 75, 826 (1995)

1995
[12]

A. A. Sirenko, P. Marsik, C. Bernhard, T. N. Stanislavchuk, V. Kiryukhin, and S.-W. Cheong, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 237401 (2019)

2019
[13]

A. Picn, A. Benseny, J. Mompart, J. R. Vzquez de Aldana, L. Pla ja, G. F. Calvo, and L. Roso, New Journal of Phys. 12, 083053 (2010)

2010
[14]

Afanasev, C

A. Afanasev, C. E. Carlson, and A. Mukherjee, Phys. Rev. A. 88 033841 (2013)

2013
[15]

Babiker, C

M. Babiker, C. R. Bennett, D. L. Andrews, and L. DavilaRomero , Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 143601 11 0 5 10 15 20 10 /g165 10 /g164 10 /g163 qz (MeV/c) d /g42e / dq z Total K /g32 1 K /g32 2 K /g32 3 K /g32 4 /g2578 /g32 5 K /g32 6 K /g32 7 Ji /g32 10 /g16 1/2 B /g32 10 13 G K /g32 ...

2002
[16]

Alexandrescu, D

A. Alexandrescu, D. Cojoc, and E. I. DiFabrizio, Phys. Rev. Le tt. 96, 243001 (2006)

2006
[18]

Katoh, M

M. Katoh, M. Fujimoto, H. Kawaguchi, K. Tsuchiya, K. Ohmi, T. K aneyasu, Y. Taira, M. Hosaka, A. Mochihashi, and Y. Takashima, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 094801 (2017)

2017
[19]

Sasaki and I

S. Sasaki and I. McNulty, Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 124801 (2008)

2008
[20]

Bahrdt, K

J. Bahrdt, K. Holldack, P. Kuske, R. M¨ uller, M. Scheer, and P. Schmid, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 034801 (2013)

2013
[21]

Kaneyasu, Y

T. Kaneyasu, Y. Hikosaka, M. Fujimoto, T. Konomi, M Katoh, H. Iwayama, and E. Shigemasa, Phys. Rev. A 95, 023413 (2017)

2017
[22]

Hemsing, A

E. Hemsing, A. Knyazik, M. Dunning, D. Xiang, A. Marinelli, C. Hast , and J. B. Rosenzweig, Nature Phys. 9, 549 (2013)

2013
[23]

Taira, T

Y. Taira, T. Hayakawa, and M. Katoh, Sci. Rep. 7, 5018 (2017)

2017
[24]

Y. Y. Chen, J. X. Li, K. Z. Hatsagortsyan, and C. H. Keitel, Phy s. Rev. Lett. 121, 074801 (2018)

2018
[25]

X. X. Zhu, M. Chen, T. P. Yu, S. M. Weng, K. X. Hu, P. McKenna, and Z. M. Sheng, Appl. Phys. 12 Lett. 112, 174102 (2018)

2018
[26]

Schwinger, Phys

J. Schwinger, Phys. Rev. 75, 1912 (1949)

1949
[27]

Schwinger, Proceedings National Academic Soci

J. Schwinger, Proceedings National Academic Soci. 40, 132 (1954)

1954
[28]

Yao and A

X. Yao and A. Belyanin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 255503 (2012)

2012
[29]

Yumoto, R

G. Yumoto, R. Matsunaga, H. Hibino, and R. Shimano, Phys. Rev . Lett. 120, 107401 (2018)

2018
[30]

Kachelriess, C

M. Kachelriess, C. Wilke, and G. Wunner, Phys. Rev. D 56, 1313 (1997)

1997
[31]

Hattri and K

K. Hattri and K. Itakura, Ann. Phys. 334, 58 (2013); K. Hattri and K. Itakura, Ann. Phys. 348, 364 (2014)

2013
[32]

Maruyama, M

T. Maruyama, M. -K. Cheoun, T. Kajino, and G. J. Mathews, Ph ys. Lett. B 75, 125 (2016)

2016
[33]

R. Kubo, S. J. Miyake, and N. Hashitsume, Solid State Phys. 17, 269 (1965)

1965
[34]

Harmit, Astrophys

M. Harmit, Astrophys. J. 597, 1266 (2003)

2003
[35]

N. M. Elias II, Astronom. Astrophys. 492, 883 (2008)

2008
[36]

G. C. G. Berkhout and M. W. Beijersbergen, Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 100801 (2008)

2008
[37]

Tamburini, B

F. Tamburini, B. Thid, G. Molina-Terriza, and G. Anzolin, Nature P hys. 7, 195 (2011)

2011
[38]

Maruyama, T

T. Maruyama, T. Hayakawa, and T. Kajino, Sci. Rep. 9, 7998 (2019)

2019
[39]

Mereghetti, Annu

S. Mereghetti, Annu. Rev. Astrophysm. 15, 225 (2008)

2008
[40]

Zhang and Z

D. Zhang and Z. G. Dai, Astrophys. J. 718, 841 (2010)

2010
[41]

C. G. Mundell, D. Kopa, D. M. Arnold, I. A. Steele, A. Gomboc, S. Kobayashi, R. M. Harrison, R. J. Smith, C. Guidorzi, F. J. Virgili, A. Melandri, and J. Japelj, Natur e, 504, 119 (2013)

2013
[42]

Kalemci, S

E. Kalemci, S. E. Boggs, C. Kouveliotou, M. Finger, and M. G. Bar ing, Astrophys. J. Supp. 169, 75 (2007)

2007
[43]

Yonetoku, T

D. Yonetoku, T. Murakami, S. Gunji, T. Mihara, K. Toma, Y. Mor ihara, T. Takahashi, Y. Wakashima, H. Yonemochi, T. Sakashita, N. Toukairin, H. Fujimoto, and Y. Kodama, Astrophys. J. Lett. 758, L1 (2012)

2012
[44]

Wiresema, S

K. Wiresema, S. Covino, K. Toma, A. J. van der Horst, K. Varela , M. Min, J. Greiner, R. L. C. Starling, N. R. Tanvir, R. A. M. J. Wijers, S. Campana, P. A. Curran , Y. Fan, J. P. U. Fynbo, J. Gorosabel, A. Gomboc, D. Gtz, J. Hjorth, Z. P. Jin, S. Kobayashi, C. Kouveliotou, C....

2014
[45]

Panaitescu and P

A. Panaitescu and P. M´ esz´ aros, Astrophys. J. Lett. 544, L17 (2000)

2000

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [17]

Afanasev, V

A. Afanasev, V. S. Serbo, and M. Solyanik, J. Phys. G. Nucl. Pa rt. Phys. 45, 055102 (2017)

work page 2017

[2] [1]

The in itial and ﬁnal electron orbitals have annual structures and their amplitudes at the center ar e zero

and the radiative photon as a function of the radius. The in itial and ﬁnal electron orbitals have annual structures and their amplitudes at the center ar e zero. The diameter of the electron motion decreases after a photon emission, because of the los s of the total angular momentum and energy. For the radiation for K = 1, the wave-function has the peak ...

work page

[3] [2]

Allen, M

L. Allen, M. W. Beijersbergen, R. J. C. Spreeuw, and J. P. Woerd man, Phys. Rev. A 45, 8185 (1992)

work page 1992

[4] [3]

U. D. Jentschura and V. G. Serbo, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 013001 (2011)

2011

[5] [4]

Petrillo, G

V. Petrillo, G. Dattoli, I. Drebot, and F. Nguyen, Phys. Rev. Let t. 117, 123903 (2016)

work page 2016

[6] [5]

J. A. Sherwin, Phys. Rev. A 95, 052101 (2017)

work page 2017

[7] [6]

A. A. Peshkov, A. V. Volotka, A. Surzhykov, and S. Fritzsche, Phys. Rev. A 97, 023802 (2018)

work page 2018

[8] [7]

Maruyama, T

T. Maruyama, T. Hayakawa, and T. Kajino, Sci. Rep. 9, 51 (2019). 10 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 γz Γ e (eV) nf = 0 nf = 1 nf = 2 nf = 3 (a)B = 1013 G Li = 10 0 10 20 30 40(c)B = 1013 G Li = 100 0 2 4 6 8 10 0 2 4 6 8 10 K γz Γ e (eV) State-1 State-2 Total (b)B = 1012 G Li = 10 0 10 20 30 40 50 0 2 4 6 8 10 K (d)B = 1012 G Li = 100 FIG. 3. Decay widths of electr...

work page 2019