English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

In this updated and expanded version of our delayed Comment we show that thenp backward cross section, as presented by the Uppsala group, is seriouslyflawed (more than 25 sd.). The main reason is the incorrect normalization ofthe data. We show also that their extrapolation method, used to determine thecharged piNN coupling constant, is a factor of about 10 less accurate thanclaimed by Ericson et al. The large extrapolation error makes the determinationof the coupling constant by the Uppsala group totally uninteresting.Comment: 5 pages, latex2e with a4wide.sty. This is an updated and extended  version of the Comment published in Phys. Rev. Letters 81, 5253 (1998

physical review letters

Comment on “<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">π</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">NN</mml:mi></mml:math>Coupling from High Precision<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">np</mml:mi></mml:math>Charge Exchange at 162 MeV”

Comment on “πNNCoupling from High PrecisionnpCharge Exchange at 162 MeV”