4.7 Article

Experimental Signatures of the Quantum Nature of Radiation Reaction in the Field of an Ultraintense Laser

期刊

PHYSICAL REVIEW X
卷 8, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

AMER PHYSICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevX.8.031004

关键词

-

资金

  1. Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC), UK [EP/P010059/1, EP/N027175/1]
  2. EPSRC [EP/M018156/1, EP/M018555/1]
  3. STFC [ST/J002062/1, ST/P002021/1]
  4. U.S. NSF CAREER Grant [1054164]
  5. U.S. DOD Grant [W911NF1610044]
  6. U.S. DOE Grant [DE-NA0002372]
  7. U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) [W911NF1610044] Funding Source: U.S. Department of Defense (DOD)
  8. EPSRC [EP/M018555/1, EP/M018156/1, EP/N027175/1, EP/P010059/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  9. STFC [ST/P000835/1, ST/P002021/1, ST/J002062/1] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The description of the dynamics of an electron in an external electromagnetic field of arbitrary intensity is one of the most fundamental outstanding problems in electrodynamics. Remarkably, to date, there is no unanimously accepted theoretical solution for ultrahigh intensities and little or no experimental data. The basic challenge is the inclusion of the self-interaction of the electron with the field emitted by the electron itself-the so-called radiation reaction force. We report here on the experimental evidence of strong radiation reaction, in an all-optical experiment, during the propagation of highly relativistic electrons (maximum energy exceeding 2 GeV) through the field of an ultraintense laser (peak intensity of 4 x 10(20) W/cm(2)). In their own rest frame, the highest-energy electrons experience an electric field as high as one quarter of the critical field of quantum electrodynamics and are seen to lose up to 30% of their kinetic energy during the propagation through the laser field. The experimental data show signatures of quantum effects in the electron dynamics in the external laser field, potentially showing departures from the constant cross field approximation.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据