Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 92 references

Particles in finite volumes and a toy model of decaying neutrons

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The neutron lifetime discrepancy could be a finite-volume artifact of confinement, a scalar toy model suggests.

desk verdict The neutron lifetime match is a fit, not a prediction: N is chosen by hand, but the finite-volume density matrix machinery is competently done and worth a reviewer's time. read the letter →

arxiv 2504.16784 v2 pith:WH5YNLW4 submitted 2025-04-23 hep-ph hep-thnucl-exnucl-thquant-ph

Christian Käding This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-phhep-thnucl-exnucl-thquant-ph
keywords finitevolumeeffectsneutronlifetimediscrepancyscalartoymodeldensitymatrixinitialcorrelationsLellouch–Lüscherfactorultra-coldstoragebeammethod
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 proposes that the long-standing discrepancy between beam and storage measurements of the neutron lifetime — about 10 seconds — may be an environmental effect, not a sign of new physics. In a finite volume with discrete momentum modes, a confined neutron's decay probability differs from the unconfined case, and the paper computes this difference by directly constructing the decay density matrix in a scalar-field toy model where the neutron and its daughters are real scalars. The central result is a lifetime formula τ = 2.53/√N s; with the initial-correlation strength N = (2π)^(-6)/2, the model gives τ ≈ 887.51 s, close to the beam-method average of 888.1 ± 2.0 s. The author argues this supports the idea that the different confining geometries of beam versus ultra-cold-neutron experiments naturally produce different measured lifetimes, without invoking exotic physics.

What carries the argument

The machinery is the direct computation of decay density matrices for quantum fields in finite volumes, using the Schwinger–Keldysh closed-time-path formalism and thermo field dynamics, with periodic boundary conditions that discretise the momentum spectrum. The load-bearing identities are the probability ratios between infinite and finite volumes (Eq. (26) for two-body decay, reducing to the Lellouch–Lüscher factor, and its three-body analogue Eq. (42)) and the lifetime formula Eq. (53), τ = 2.53/√N s, which follows from a first-order-in-α transition driven by the assumed initial correlation between the neutron and its daughter particles.

What would settle it

Measure the neutron lifetime in a storage trap at two markedly different volumes with identical wall material, magnetic field, and detection efficiency; the standard picture predicts identical lifetimes, while this model predicts a lifetime that changes with the confining volume. A null result — no volume dependence within about a second — would falsify the finite-volume explanation.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper claims that finite volume effects can change the measured lifetime of a decaying particle, and that including them in a toy model of neutron decay brings the predicted lifetime to the observed scale. The quantitative core is Eq. (53): τ = 2.53/√N s, where N is a real number parametrising the initial correlation between the neutron and its decay products (density-matrix element ρ = N V δ_{p+k+l,0}/(E^φ_p + E^χ_k + E^ν_l − M)). Setting N = (2π)^(-6)/2 gives τ ≈ 887.51 s, within about half a second of the beam-method value. The paper also shows that without the initial correlations the model produces lifetimes that are far too long (≈ 5.8 × $10^{5}$ s with an unconfined neutrino, and vastly larger with all particles confined), and it derives the finite-to-infinite volume probability ratios in Eqs. (27) and (42), where the two-body ratio coincides with the Lellouch–Lüscher factor. The final message is that the beam-versus-storage lifetime discrepancy could be a consequence of the different confinement and boundary conditions of the experiments.

Load-bearing premise

The value that makes the model agree with experiment, N = (2π)^(-6)/2, is chosen by hand after the fact: nothing in the paper predicts or measures the strength of the initial neutron–daughter correlation, and a different N changes the lifetime in proportion to 1/√N.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The 10 s gap between beam measurements (τ ≈ 888.1 s) and ultra-cold-neutron storage measurements (τ ≈ 878.4 s) could be explained by the different confinement structures of the two techniques, with no new physics required.
  • The model predicts that a confined neutron's apparent lifetime changes with the trap geometry; lifetime measurements in larger traps should show longer lifetimes, a direction consistent with an earlier variable-length neutron-trap experiment.
  • Initial correlations between the neutron and its decay products change the effective order of the decay process (from α² to α), making initial-state correlations a potentially decisive ingredient in precision lifetime determinations.
  • The derived finite-to-infinite volume decay-probability ratios give a quantitative, testable relation between confined and unconfined scalar decays, with the two-body case reproducing the known Lellouch–Lüscher factor.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A dedicated experiment measuring τ in a single storage trap whose volume is varied while wall material, magnetic field, and detection efficiency stay fixed would test the core proposal: the model predicts a volume-dependent lifetime, the standard picture predicts none.
  • Until the free parameter N is derived from a microscopic description of the initial neutron state, the agreement at 887.51 s is best treated as a one-parameter fit rather than an ab initio prediction.
  • If such initial correlations are physically present, similar corrections should appear in other precision beta-decay and confinement measurements, with the effect depending on how the parent particle is prepared, not just on the trap size.
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.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript computes density-matrix elements and decay probabilities for real scalar fields in finite volumes with periodic boundary conditions, first for a two-body decay ϕ→φ^2 and then for a three-body process ϕ→φχν used as a toy model of neutron β-decay. The neutron toy model takes ϕ,φ,χ,ν as scalar stand-ins for the neutron, proton, electron, and antineutrino, and uses the volume of the planned τSPECT magnetic trap. After finding an unphysically long lifetime when all particles are confined, the author treats the neutrino as unconfined, and then introduces initial correlations between the neutron and its decay products. With these ingredients the model yields τ≈887.51 s, which the paper interprets as support for the proposal that finite-volume effects can influence neutron-lifetime measurements.

Significance. If the quantitative agreement were a genuine prediction, the proposal would offer an environment-dependent explanation of the neutron-lifetime discrepancy without new physics, and the comparison of the two-body finite- and infinite-volume probabilities with the Lellouch-Lüscher factor is a useful consistency check. However, the central numerical result rests on two undetermined inputs: the normalization N of the initial-correlation density matrix and the phase-space replacement constant C transferred from the two-body decay. With both quantities effectively free, the agreement with the experimental lifetime is a fit rather than a test of the finite-volume mechanism. The lack of a prediction from the model, together with the boundary-condition mismatch noted below, limits the significance of the paper's central claim.

major comments (3)
  1. [§IV D, Eq. (53)] The central lifetime result is a fit, not a prediction. Equation (53) gives τ = 2.53/√N s, and the text then chooses N = 1/2 (2π)^6 to obtain τ ≈ 887.51 s. The initial correlation density matrix ρ = N V δ/(E_sum − E_φφχν) is introduced ad hoc; no physical mechanism fixes N. The author explicitly acknowledges in Sec. V that future work 'will need to have knowledge of the initial states of the neutrons entering the experiment, including correlations between a neutron and its decay products,' confirming that the model does not determine N. Since a different N changes the lifetime proportionally, the agreement with the experimental value is imposed by hand.
  2. [§IV B, Eqs. (36), (38), (48)] The replacement ∫d^3p → C = 4(2π)^3 M^3 is calibrated in the two-body decay of Sec. III and then applied to the three-body neutron decay. The text states that the author can 'only speculate that this replacement is applicable here as well.' The resulting absolute decay probability and lifetime depend on this C, and no three-body derivation or lattice/QFT justification is provided. This is a second free parameter in the chain leading to Eq. (53), and without it the excellent agreement with the neutron lifetime is not obtained.
  3. [§II and §IV] The finite-volume calculation uses periodic boundary conditions on a torus, whereas the physical trap is described as having 'perfectly reflecting' walls. Periodic boundary conditions do not describe reflection at a boundary; reflecting walls would require Dirichlet or Neumann conditions and a different mode spectrum. Since the paper's proposal is that different experimental confinement structures cause the lifetime discrepancy, the mismatch between the modeled boundary conditions and the claimed experimental situation is load-bearing for the proposed explanation.
minor comments (5)
  1. [§III B, Eq. (26)] The constant C is first introduced as an unknown replacement for the differentials and then fixed by identifying Eq. (26) with the Lellouch-Lüscher factor; the logic would be clearer if the identification, and the assumptions entering it, were stated explicitly before concluding C = 4(2π)^3 M^3.
  2. [§IV D, Eq. (49)] The symmetrization term [(p,k,l) ↔ (p′,k′,l′)]* is written symbolically; please specify explicitly whether this denotes the full complex-conjugated diagram or only part of it, since the probability in Eq. (50) depends on the exact phase structure.
  3. [§IV B, Eq. (43)] The bound ℵ_n ≤ n is used without justification for the large-n counting in the toy model; while the bound is true, it is too crude to support the conclusion that ℵ_n can never be large enough, and a comment on the actual count for the cylindrical trap would be helpful.
  4. [§IV C, Eq. (48)] The numerical value τ ≈ 580097.21 s is quoted to five significant figures despite the crude phase-space replacement and energy-conserving approximation; fewer significant digits would be more appropriate.
  5. [General] The text alternates between 'perfectly reflecting boundaries' and 'periodic boundary conditions' when describing the trap; a sentence reconciling these, or an explicit statement that the periodic box is only a proxy for a reflecting trap, would avoid confusion.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 8.0 of 10

Neutron lifetime 'prediction' is a fit: Eq. (53) chooses N = (2π)^6/2 after the fact to reach 887.51 s, and the phase-space constant C is calibrated on the two-body Lellouch–Lüscher ratio.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Sec. IV D, Eqs. (51)-(53); Sec. IV C and Sec. V]
    "we assume initial correlation density matrix elements of the form ρ1,0,0,0;0,1,1,1(p + k + l; ; ;|; p; k; l|0) = NVδ p+k+l,0/(Eφ p+Eχ k+Eν l−Eϕ p+k+l) with some real number N . ... If we choose N = 1/2(2π)6, then we obtain τ≈ 887.51 s as was suggested in Sec. IV C."

    N is introduced as a free normalization ('with some real number N') and is never derived from the model. Eq. (53) makes τ proportional to 1/sqrt(N), and the text then sets N = (2π)^6/2, a value not obtained from any physical input, precisely to land near the previously suggested value 886.93 s and the experimental neutron lifetime. The claimed 'prediction' τ ≈ 887.51 s is therefore an inverse fit of N, not a derived result. The author later concedes the missing input in Sec. V: 'we will need to have knowledge of the initial states of the neutrons entering the experiment, including correlations between a neutron and its decay products as we have used in Sec. IV D.' Different choices of N give different lifetimes, so the numerical agreement with experiment is forced by construction.

  2. ansatz smuggled in via citation [Sec. III B, Eqs. (24)-(27); Sec. IV B-C, Eqs. (36), (47)]
    "Since it essentially stems from the same type of decay process, the ratio in Eq. (26) must actually be the Lellouch-Lüscher factor ... From this, we conclude that C = 4(2π)3M 3 ... we do the same replacement as in Sec. III, i.e., ∫ d3p→C = 4(2π)3M 3. Certainly, we can only speculate that this replacement is applicable here as well since the neutron toy model decay process is different from the one discussed in Sec. III."

    The constant C is not computed for the three-body neutron decay. It is fixed in Sec. III by demanding that Eq. (26) reproduce the known Lellouch-Lüscher factor for a two-body decay, and is then transplanted into the three-body phase-space integrals for the proton and the neutrino. Consequently, the numerical prefactor entering the lifetime formulae (Eqs. (47) and (53)) is calibrated against a different process. The author's own statement that this is only 'speculate[d]' confirms that C is an input assumption rather than a derived prediction, so the final agreement with the measured neutron lifetime is partly calibrated rather than independently derived.

full rationale

The density-matrix computation itself is not circular: the finite/infinite-volume ratio in Sec. III is explicitly benchmarked against the known Lellouch-Lüscher factor, and the same-author formalism of Refs. [69-72] is used as a calculational technique, not to forbid alternatives or to import a uniqueness theorem. However, the paper's central quantitative claim, that the toy model predicts τ ≈ 887.51 s, reduces to a fit. The free normalization N is introduced in Sec. IV D, enters Eq. (53) as τ ∝ 1/sqrt(N), and is then set to 1/2(2π)^6 specifically to approach the experimental/suggested value. A second adjustable element, the phase-space replacement C, is calibrated in the two-body problem and reused for the three-body decay, with the author admitting this is speculative. With two fitted inputs available, the agreement with the neutron lifetime is forced by construction rather than being an independent success of the finite-volume mechanism. The qualitative volume dependence (τ ∝ sqrt(V)) is a genuine derived feature, which is why the score is 8 rather than 10.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The central numbers rest on two calibrated inputs: the phase-space replacement constant C, fixed by matching the Lellouch-Luscher factor in the two-body decay and then reused for the three-body decay, and the initial-correlation normalization N, chosen to reproduce the experimental neutron lifetime. The model also assumes scalar fields and periodic boundary conditions approximate a fermionic weak decay in a magnetic trap, and that tree-level order is sufficient. No independent evidence is provided for the initial correlation amplitude.

free parameters (3)
  • Phase-space replacement constant C = 4 (2 pi)^3 M^3
    Introduced as an unknown constant replacing integrals over d^3 p in the infinite-volume probability. Fixed by requiring the ratio P_infty / P_V in Eq. (26) to match the known Lellouch-Luscher factor from Ref. [8], then applied to the three-body neutron decay in Secs. IV B and IV C.
  • Initial correlation normalization N = 1/2 (2 pi)^6
    Appears in Eq. (53) as tau = 2.53 / sqrt(N) s. The value is chosen after the fact so that tau is about 887.51 s, matching the experimental neutron lifetime. No independent prediction or measurement is given.
  • Neutrino mass m_nu = 0.7 eV
    Hand-picked input used to determine the energy-conserving momentum in Eq. (37) and the final lifetime. The chosen value is higher than current cosmological upper bounds on neutrino masses, so it is a model choice rather than a measured constant.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Real scalar fields with a contact interaction are a sufficient toy model for neutron beta decay.
    Neutron, proton, electron and neutrino are represented by spinless fields with masses set to the real particle masses and a phi phi chi nu vertex. Spin, chirality, weak gauge structure and nucleon compositeness are ignored (Sec. IV).
  • domain assumption Periodic boundary conditions are equivalent to perfectly reflecting trap walls.
    Sec. II uses periodic boundary conditions for finite volumes, while Sec. IV describes the tauSPECT trap as perfectly reflecting. The equivalence is assumed without derivation.
  • ad hoc to paper The replacement integral d^3 p goes to C = 4 (2 pi)^3 M^3 is valid for the three-body decay.
    Stated in Sec. IV B: 'we can only speculate that this replacement is applicable here as well.' The lifetime formula depends on this constant.
  • ad hoc to paper Initial correlations of the form rho = N V delta / (E_sum - E_phi) exist at t = 0.
    Postulated in Sec. IV D to produce a first-order-in-alpha decay probability. The normalization N is not derived and is tuned to match experiment.
  • domain assumption Tree-level order alpha squared, neglecting loop corrections and finite-volume mass shifts, is sufficient.
    The paper argues mass corrections only appear at higher order in Secs. III A and IV A and drops them.
invented entities (1)
  • Initial neutron-daughter correlation in Fock space
    purpose: Allows the decay probability to be first order in alpha instead of alpha squared, shortening the predicted lifetime by about three orders of magnitude.
    No physical mechanism or measurement is given. The amplitude N is chosen to reproduce the experimental lifetime, so it functions as an adjustable input rather than an independently evidenced entity.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Particles in finite volumes and a toy model of decaying neutrons." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/WH5YNLW4

@misc{pith2026250416784,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Particles in finite volumes and a toy model of decaying neutrons},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/WH5YNLW4}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2504.16784}
}
abstract

It is well-known that the momentum spectra of particles confined to finite spatial volumes deviate from the continuous spectra used for unconfined particles. In this article, we consider real scalar particles confined to finite volumes with periodic boundary conditions, such that the particles' spectra are discrete. We directly compute the density matrices describing the decay processes $\phi \to \varphi^2$ and $\phi \to \varphi\chi\nu$, and subsequently derive expressions for the decay probabilities both for confined and unconfined particles. The latter decay process is used as a rough toy model for a neutron decaying into a proton, an electron, and an anti-electron neutrino. We propose that finite volume effects can have an impact on the outcomes of experiments measuring the neutron lifetime. In addition, our findings at the toy model level suggest that taking into account possible initial correlations between neutrons and their daughter particles might be relevant as well.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2504.16784 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1: Taken from Ref. [72]; the crossed box represents the single [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2: Diagram for neutron decay; the crossed box represents the single [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3: Diagram for a neutron correlated with its daughter particles; the crossed box represents [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_3.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

92 extracted references · 42 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    H. B. G. Casimir, On the attraction between two perfectly conducting plates , Indag. Math. 10 (1948) 261

    1948

  2. [2]

    G. T. Moore, Quantum Theory of the Electromagnetic Field in a Variable-Length One-Dimensional Cavity, J. Math. Phys. 11 (1970) 2679

    1970

  3. [3]

    E. M. Purcell, Spontaneous Emission Probabilities at Radio Frequencies, Physical Review 69 (1946) 681

    1946

  4. [4]

    L¨ uscher,Volume Dependence of the Energy Spectrum in Massive Quantum Field Theories

    M. L¨ uscher,Volume Dependence of the Energy Spectrum in Massive Quantum Field Theories. 1. Stable Particle States , Commun. Math. Phys. 104 (1986) 177

    1986

  5. [5]

    L¨ uscher,Volume Dependence of the Energy Spectrum in Massive Quantum Field Theories

    M. L¨ uscher,Volume Dependence of the Energy Spectrum in Massive Quantum Field Theories. 2. Scattering States, Commun. Math. Phys. 105 (1986) 153

    1986

  6. [6]

    L¨ uscher,Two particle states on a torus and their relation to the scattering matrix , Nucl

    M. L¨ uscher,Two particle states on a torus and their relation to the scattering matrix , Nucl. Phys. B 354 (1991) 531

    1991

  7. [7]

    L¨ uscher,Signatures of unstable particles in finite volume , Nucl

    M. L¨ uscher,Signatures of unstable particles in finite volume , Nucl. Phys. B 364 (1991) 237

    1991

  8. [8]

    Lellouch and M

    L. Lellouch and M. L¨ uscher,Weak transition matrix elements from finite volume correlation functions, Commun. Math. Phys. 219 (2001) 31 [ hep-lat/0003023]

    arXiv 2001

Show all 92 references
  1. [9]

    Takagi, Shin and Tanzawa, Tˆ oru,Quantum Mechanics of a Particle Confined to a Twisted Ring , Progress of Theoretical Physics 87 (1992) 561

    1992

  2. [10]

    V. V. Bazhanov, S. L. Lukyanov and A. B. Zamolodchikov, Integrable quantum field theories in finite volume: Excited state energies , Nucl. Phys. B 489 (1997) 487 [ hep-th/9607099]

    1997 arXiv

  3. [11]

    H. B. Meyer, Finite Volume Effects in Thermal Field Theory , JHEP 07 (2009) 059 [ 0905.1663]

    2009 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Gromov, V

    N. Gromov, V. Kazakov and P. Vieira, Finite Volume Spectrum of 2D Field Theories from Hirota Dynamics, JHEP 12 (2009) 060 [ 0812.5091]

    2009 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Polejaeva and A

    K. Polejaeva and A. Rusetsky, Three particles in a finite volume , Eur. Phys. J. A 48 (2012) 67 [1203.1241]

    2012 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Kreuzer and H

    S. Kreuzer and H. W. Grießhammer, Three particles in a finite volume: The breakdown of spherical symmetry, Eur. Phys. J. A 48 (2012) 93 [ 1205.0277]

    2012 arXiv

  7. [15]

    R. A. Brice˜ no and M. T. Hansen, Relativistic, model-independent, multichannel 2→ 2 transition amplitudes in a finite volume , Phys. Rev. D 94 (2016) 013008 [ 1509.08507]. 24

    2016 arXiv

  8. [16]

    L. C. Barbado, A. L. B´ aez-Camargo and I. Fuentes, Evolution of confined quantum scalar fields in curved spacetime. Part I: Spacetimes without boundaries or with static boundaries in a synchronous gauge, Eur. Phys. J. C 80 (2020) 796 [ 1811.10507]

    2020 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Romero-L´ opez, S

    F. Romero-L´ opez, S. R. Sharpe, T. D. Blanton, R. A. Brice˜ no and M. T. Hansen,Numerical exploration of three relativistic particles in a finite volume including two-particle resonances and bound states, JHEP 10 (2019) 007 [ 1908.02411]

    2019 arXiv

  10. [18]

    B. A. Ju´ arez-Aubry and R. Weder,Quantum field theory with dynamical boundary conditions and the Casimir effect: coherent states , J. Phys. A 54 (2021) 105203 [ 2008.02842]

    2021 arXiv

  11. [19]

    L. C. Barbado, A. L. B´ aez-Camargo and I. Fuentes, Evolution of confined quantum scalar fields in curved spacetime. Part II: Spacetimes with moving boundaries in any synchronous gauge , Eur. Phys. J. C 81 (2021) 953 [ 2106.14923]

    2021 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Guo and V

    P. Guo and V. Gasparian, Charged particles interaction in both a finite volume and a uniform magnetic field, Phys. Rev. D 103 (2021) 094520

    2021

  13. [21]

    T. D. Blanton and S. R. Sharpe, Three-particle finite-volume formalism for π+π+K+ and related systems, Phys. Rev. D 104 (2021) 034509 [ 2105.12094]

    2021 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Zhao, Y.-L

    H. Zhao, Y.-L. Wang, C.-Z. Ye, R. Cheng, G.-H. Liang and H. Liu, Quantum mechanics of a fermion confined to a curved surface in Foldy-Wouthuysen representation , Phys. Rev. A 105 (2022) 052220 [2111.14058]

    2022 arXiv

  15. [23]

    J. R. Klauder, A Valid Quantization of the Particle in a Box Field Theory, and Well Beyond , Axioms 11 (2022) 567 [ 2209.06137]

    2022 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Bajnok, G

    Z. Bajnok, G. Linardopoulos, I. M. Sz´ ecs´ enyi and I. Vona,Finite volume form factors in integrable theories, JHEP 02 (2024) 083 [ 2304.09135]

    2024 arXiv

  17. [25]

    W.-Y. Ai, J. Alexandre, M. Carosi, B. Garbrecht and S. Pla, Double-well instantons in finite volume , JHEP 05 (2024) 099 [ 2402.09863]

    2024 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Alexandre, D

    J. Alexandre, D. Backhouse, E.-A. Kontou, D. P. Santos and S. Pla, Mapping 1+1-dimensional black hole thermodynamics to finite volume effects , 2405.14942

    arXiv

  19. [27]

    Garc´ ıa Mart´ ın-Caro, G

    A. Garc´ ıa Mart´ ın-Caro, G. Garc´ ıa-Moreno, J. Olmedo and J. M. S´ anchez Vel´ azquez,Classical and quantum field theory in a box with moving boundaries: A numerical study of the dynamical Casimir effect, Phys. Rev. D 110 (2024) 025007 [ 2404.06166]

    2024 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Alexandre and D

    J. Alexandre and D. Backhouse, Tunneling and the Casimir effect on a D-dimensional sphere , Phys. Rev. D 110 (2024) L121703 [ 2408.17189]

    2024 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Auler et al., Ultra-cold neutron simulation framework for the free neutron lifetime experiment τSPECT, 2503.15239

    J. Auler et al., Ultra-cold neutron simulation framework for the free neutron lifetime experiment τSPECT, 2503.15239

  22. [30]

    G. J. Mathews, T. Kajino and T. Shima, Big Bang nucleosynthesis with a new neutron lifetime , Phys. Rev. D 71 (2005) 021302 [ astro-ph/0408523]

    2005 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Chowdhury and S

    T. Chowdhury and S. Ipek, Neutron lifetime anomaly and Big Bang nucleosynthesis , Can. J. Phys. 102 (2024) 96 [ 2210.12031]. 25

    2024 arXiv

  24. [32]

    F. E. Wietfeldt, The Neutron Lifetime Discrepancy and Its Implications for Cosmology and Dark Matter, Symmetry 16 (2024) 956

    2024

  25. [33]

    Abele, The neutron

    H. Abele, The neutron. Its properties and basic interactions , Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 60 (2008) 1

    2008

  26. [34]

    J. M. Robson, The Radioactive Decay of the Neutron , Phys. Rev. 83 (1951) 349

    1951

  27. [35]

    J. S. Nico et al., Measurement of the neutron lifetime by counting trapped protons in a cold neutron beam, Phys. Rev. C 71 (2005) 055502 [ nucl-ex/0411041]

    2005 arXiv

  28. [36]

    A. T. Yue, M. S. Dewey, D. M. Gilliam, G. L. Greene, A. B. Laptev, J. S. Nico et al., Improved Determination of the Neutron Lifetime , Phys. Rev. Lett. 111 (2013) 222501 [ 1309.2623]

    2013 arXiv

  29. [37]

    C. L. Morris, E. R. Adamek, L. J. Broussard, N. B. Callahan, S. M. Clayton, C. Cude-Woods et al., A new method for measuring the neutron lifetime using an in situ neutron detector , Rev. Sci. Instrum. 88 (2017) 053508

    2017

  30. [38]

    R. W. Pattie, Jr. et al., Measurement of the neutron lifetime using a magneto-gravitational trap and in situ detection , Science 360 (2018) 627 [ 1707.01817]

    2018 arXiv

  31. [39]

    UCNτ collaboration, F. M. Gonzalez et al., Improved neutron lifetime measurement with UCNτ, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127 (2021) 162501 [ 2106.10375]

    2021 arXiv

  32. [40]

    A. P. Serebrov et al., Neutron lifetime measurements with a large gravitational trap for ultracold neutrons, Phys. Rev. C 97 (2018) 055503 [ 1712.05663]

    2018 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Mampe, L

    W. Mampe, L. N. Bondarenko, V. I. Morozov, Y. N. Panin and A. I. Fomin, Measuring neutron lifetime by storing ultracold neutrons and detecting inelastically scattered neutrons , JETP Lett. 57 (1993) 82

    1993

  34. [42]

    Serebrov, V

    A. Serebrov, V. Varlamov, A. Kharitonov, A. Fomin, Y. Pokotilovski, P. Geltenbort et al., Measurement of the neutron lifetime using a gravitational trap and a low-temperature Fomblin coating , Phys. Lett. B 605 (2005) 72

    2005

  35. [43]

    Pichlmaier, V

    A. Pichlmaier, V. Varlamov, K. Schreckenbach and P. Geltenbort, Neutron lifetime measurement with the UCN trap-in-trap MAMBO II , Phys. Lett. B 693 (2010) 221

    2010

  36. [44]

    Steyerl, J

    A. Steyerl, J. M. Pendlebury, C. Kaufman, S. S. Malik and A. M. Desai, Quasielastic scattering in the interaction of ultracold neutrons with a liquid wall and application in a reanalysis of the Mambo I neutron-lifetime experiment, Phys. Rev. C 85 (2012) 065503

    2012

  37. [45]

    Arzumanov, L

    S. Arzumanov, L. Bondarenko, S. Chernyavsky, P. Geltenbort, V. Morozov, V. V. Nesvizhevsky et al., A measurement of the neutron lifetime using the method of storage of ultracold neutrons and detection of inelastically up-scattered neutrons, Phys. Lett. B 745 (2015) 79

    2015

  38. [46]

    V. F. Ezhov et al., Measurement of the neutron lifetime with ultra-cold neutrons stored in a magneto-gravitational trap, JETP Lett. 107 (2018) 671 [ 1412.7434]

    2018 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Musedinovic et al., Measurement of the free neutron lifetime in a magneto-gravitational trap with in situ detection , Phys

    R. Musedinovic et al., Measurement of the free neutron lifetime in a magneto-gravitational trap with in situ detection , Phys. Rev. C 111 (2025) 045501 [ 2409.05560]

    2025 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Abele, M

    H. Abele, M. Astruc Hoffmann, S. Baessler, D. Dubbers, F. Gluck, U. Muller et al., Is the unitarity of the quark mixing CKM matrix violated in neutron beta decay? , Phys. Rev. Lett. 88 (2002) 211801 26 [hep-ex/0206058]

    2002 arXiv

  41. [49]

    D. Mund, B. Maerkisch, M. Deissenroth, J. Krempel, M. Schumann, H. Abele et al., Determination of the Weak Axial Vector Coupling from a Measurement of the Beta-Asymmetry Parameter A in Neutron Beta Decay, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110 (2013) 172502 [ 1204.0013]

    2013 arXiv

  42. [50]

    M¨ arkisch et al.,Measurement of the Weak Axial-Vector Coupling Constant in the Decay of Free Neutrons Using a Pulsed Cold Neutron Beam , Phys

    B. M¨ arkisch et al.,Measurement of the Weak Axial-Vector Coupling Constant in the Decay of Free Neutrons Using a Pulsed Cold Neutron Beam , Phys. Rev. Lett. 122 (2019) 242501 [ 1812.04666]

    2019 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Fuwa et al., Improved measurements of neutron lifetime with cold neutron beam at J-PARC , 2412.19519

    Y. Fuwa et al., Improved measurements of neutron lifetime with cold neutron beam at J-PARC , 2412.19519

    arXiv

  44. [52]

    Altarev et al., Neutron to Mirror-Neutron Oscillations in the Presence of Mirror Magnetic Fields , Phys

    I. Altarev et al., Neutron to Mirror-Neutron Oscillations in the Presence of Mirror Magnetic Fields , Phys. Rev. D 80 (2009) 032003 [ 0905.4208]

    2009 arXiv

  45. [53]

    Barducci, M

    D. Barducci, M. Fabbrichesi and E. Gabrielli, Neutral Hadrons Disappearing into the Darkness , Phys. Rev. D 98 (2018) 035049 [ 1806.05678]

    2018 arXiv

  46. [54]

    Berezhiani, Neutron lifetime puzzle and neutron–mirror neutron oscillation , Eur

    Z. Berezhiani, Neutron lifetime puzzle and neutron–mirror neutron oscillation , Eur. Phys. J. C 79 (2019) 484 [ 1807.07906]

    2019 arXiv

  47. [55]

    Berezhiani and A

    Z. Berezhiani and A. Vainshtein, Neutron–Antineutron Oscillations: Discrete Symmetries and Quark Operators, Phys. Lett. B 788 (2019) 58 [ 1809.00997]

    2019 arXiv

  48. [56]

    Dubbers, H

    D. Dubbers, H. Saul, B. M¨ arkisch, T. Soldner and H. Abele, Exotic decay channels are not the cause of the neutron lifetime anomaly , Phys. Lett. B 791 (2019) 6 [ 1812.00626]

    2019 arXiv

  49. [57]

    Klopf, E

    M. Klopf, E. Jericha, B. M¨ arkisch, H. Saul, T. Soldner and H. Abele, Constraints on the Dark Matter Interpretationn→χ +e+e− of the Neutron Decay Anomaly with the PERKEO II experiment , Phys. Rev. Lett. 122 (2019) 222503 [ 1905.01912]

    2019 arXiv

  50. [58]

    Belfatto, R

    B. Belfatto, R. Beradze and Z. Berezhiani, The CKM unitarity problem: A trace of new physics at the TeV scale?, Eur. Phys. J. C 80 (2020) 149 [ 1906.02714]

    2020 arXiv

  51. [59]

    Giacosa and G

    F. Giacosa and G. Pagliara, Measurement of the neutron lifetime and inverse quantum Zeno effect , Phys. Rev. D 101 (2020) 056003 [ 1906.10024]

    2020 arXiv

  52. [60]

    Tan, Neutron Lifetime Anomaly and Mirror Matter Theory , Universe 9 (2023) 180 [ 2302.07805]

    W. Tan, Neutron Lifetime Anomaly and Mirror Matter Theory , Universe 9 (2023) 180 [ 2302.07805]

    2023 arXiv

  53. [61]

    Fornal, Neutron Dark Decay, Universe 9 (2023) 449 [ 2306.11349]

    B. Fornal, Neutron Dark Decay, Universe 9 (2023) 449 [ 2306.11349]

    2023 arXiv

  54. [62]

    Dvali, M

    G. Dvali, M. Ettengruber and A. Stuhlfauth, Kaluza-Klein spectroscopy from neutron oscillations into hidden dimensions, Phys. Rev. D 109 (2024) 055046 [ 2312.13278]

    2024 arXiv

  55. [63]

    Koch and F

    B. Koch and F. Hummel, Exciting hint toward the solution of the neutron lifetime puzzle , Phys. Rev. D 110 (2024) 073004 [ 2403.00914]

    2024 arXiv

  56. [64]

    Oks, New results on the two-body decay of neutrons shed new light on neutron stars , New Astronomy 113 (2024) 102275

    E. Oks, New results on the two-body decay of neutrons shed new light on neutron stars , New Astronomy 113 (2024) 102275

    2024

  57. [65]

    A. M. Desai, Possible explanation for the neutron lifetime puzzle , Open Physics 23 (2025) 20240113

    2025

  58. [66]

    Auler et al., τSPECT: a spin-flip loaded magnetic ultracold neutron trap for a determination of the neutron lifetime, J

    J. Auler et al., τSPECT: a spin-flip loaded magnetic ultracold neutron trap for a determination of the neutron lifetime, J. Phys. G 51 (2024) 115103 [ 2311.00712]

    2024

  59. [67]

    He and K.-D

    F. He and K.-D. Zhu, Measurement of Neutron Lifetime and Purcell Effect , 2104.02931. 27

    arXiv

  60. [68]

    Cea, On the neutron lifetime anomaly , 2104.07265

    P. Cea, On the neutron lifetime anomaly , 2104.07265

    arXiv

  61. [69]

    Burrage, C

    C. Burrage, C. K¨ ading, P. Millington and J. Min´ aˇ r,Open quantum dynamics induced by light scalar fields, Phys. Rev. D 100 (2019) 076003 [ 1812.08760]

    2019 arXiv

  62. [70]

    Burrage, C

    C. Burrage, C. K¨ ading, P. Millington and J. Min´ aˇ r,Influence functionals, decoherence and conformally coupled scalars, J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 1275 (2019) 012041 [ 1902.09607]

    2019 arXiv

  63. [71]

    K¨ ading and M

    C. K¨ ading and M. Pitschmann,New method for directly computing reduced density matrices , Phys. Rev. D 107 (2023) 016005 [ 2204.08829]

    2023 arXiv

  64. [72]

    K¨ ading and M

    C. K¨ ading and M. Pitschmann,Density Matrix Formalism for Interacting Quantum Fields , Universe 8 (2022) 601 [ 2210.06991]

    2022 arXiv

  65. [73]

    J. S. Schwinger, Brownian Motion of a Quantum Oscillator , J. Math. Phys. 2 (1961) 407

    1961

  66. [74]

    L. V. Keldysh, Diagram technique for nonequilibrium processes, Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 47 (1964) 1515

    1964

  67. [75]

    Takahasi and H

    Y. Takahasi and H. Umezawa, Thermo field dynamics , Collect. Phenom. 2 (1975) 55

    1975

  68. [76]

    Arimitsu and H

    T. Arimitsu and H. Umezawa, A General Formulation of Nonequilibrium Thermo Field Dynamics , Prog. Theor. Phys. 74 (1985) 429

    1985

  69. [77]

    Arimitsu and H

    T. Arimitsu and H. Umezawa, Non-Equilibrium Thermo Field Dynamics , Prog. Theor. Phys. 77 (1987) 32

    1987

  70. [78]

    F. C. Khanna, A. P. C. Malbouisson, J. M. C. Malbouisson and A. E. Santana, Thermal Quantum Field Theory: Algebraic Aspects and Applications . World Scientific, Singapore, 2009

    2009

  71. [79]

    K¨ ading, M

    C. K¨ ading, M. Pitschmann and C. Voith,Dilaton-induced open quantum dynamics , Eur. Phys. J. C 83 (2023) 767 [ 2306.10896]

    2023 arXiv

  72. [80]

    M. J. Fahn and K. Giesel, Gravitationally induced decoherence of a scalar field: investigating the one-particle sector and its interplay with renormalisation , 2409.12790

  73. [81]

    K¨ ading,Frequency shifts induced by light scalar fields , Phys

    C. K¨ ading,Frequency shifts induced by light scalar fields , Phys. Dark Univ. 47 (2025) 101788 [2410.11567]

    2025 arXiv

  74. [82]

    Burrage and C

    C. Burrage and C. K¨ ading,Fock state probability changes in open quantum systems , 2502.07673

  75. [83]

    K¨ ading and M

    C. K¨ ading and M. Pitschmann,Density matrices in quantum field theory: Non-Markovianity, path integrals and master equations , 2503.08567

    arXiv

  76. [84]

    Huang, Quantum Field Theory: From Operators to Path Integrals , Physics textbook

    K. Huang, Quantum Field Theory: From Operators to Path Integrals , Physics textbook. Wiley, 2010

    2010

  77. [85]

    Peterken, Exploring quantization conditions: relating finite-volume data to infinite-volume observables, Ph.D

    T. Peterken, Exploring quantization conditions: relating finite-volume data to infinite-volume observables, Ph.D. thesis, Edinburgh U., 2024. 10.7488/era/5326

    2024 doi

  78. [86]

    J.-Y. Pang, R. Bubna, F. M¨ uller, A. Rusetsky and J.-J. Wu, Lellouch-L¨ uscher factor for the K→ 3π decays, JHEP 05 (2024) 269 [ 2312.04391]

    2024 arXiv

  79. [87]

    Navas et al., Review of particle physics , Phys

    Particle Data Group collaboration, S. Navas et al., Review of particle physics , Phys. Rev. D 110 (2024) 030001

    2024

  80. [88]

    Cabibbo, Unitary Symmetry and Leptonic Decays , Phys

    N. Cabibbo, Unitary Symmetry and Leptonic Decays , Phys. Rev. Lett. 10 (1963) 531

    1963

  81. [89]

    Kobayashi and T

    M. Kobayashi and T. Maskawa, CP Violation in the Renormalizable Theory of Weak Interaction , Prog. Theor. Phys. 49 (1973) 652. 28

    1973

  82. [90]

    Mampe, P

    W. Mampe, P. Ageron, C. Bates, J. M. Pendlebury and A. Steyerl, Neutron Lifetime Measured With Stored Ultracold Neutrons, Phys. Rev. Lett. 63 (1989) 593

    1989

  83. [91]

    G. C. Wick, The evaluation of the collision matrix , Phys. Rev. 80 (1950) 268

    1950

  84. [92]

    K¨ ading,Astro- and Quantum Physical Tests of Screened Scalar Fields , Ph.D

    C. K¨ ading,Astro- and Quantum Physical Tests of Screened Scalar Fields , Ph.D. thesis, U. Nottingham, 2019. 1910.05738

    2019 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.