{"record":{"author":{"account_ref":null,"orcid":null},"builds_on":[],"content_schema":"pubphys.content.revision/1","content_sha256":"8596a4efc1088199b6a0f499df76da15d72e05a46c3dd4e226a40cba66eabc2d","created":"2026-10-15T23:43:22Z","files":[],"origin":{"assisted_by":["ai:gpt-5.5"],"kind":"seed"},"parents":["ce59fb6cd812fc05906d0c60a71c75ea22bc686bcf38e7c3ef7010834d98ee7b","d70706ea6a491562139203ee9cf03558b01ce2b06a2e5621a4836a2dfa7a981c"],"salt":"ae76d8c72b804df832e1cd9084d97fb0fdcbdbb8baf3b637a0d45d58ad549016","schema":"pubphys.record/2","site":"pubphys.com","target":null,"type":"revision"},"content":{"answer_type":"identification","assisted_by":["ai:gpt-5.5"],"external_id":"nuc.proton-structure.charge-radius-residual","kind":"phenomenon","literature_status":"partially-resolved","n":"2","parents":[],"plain":"Muonic hydrogen (a proton orbited by a muon, a heavy cousin of the electron) and the most precise hydrogen measurements give a proton radius of about $0.84\\,\\mathrm{fm}$ ($1\\,\\mathrm{fm} = 10^{-13}\\,\\mathrm{cm}$). Electron-scattering experiments disagree with each other, one giving $0.83\\,\\mathrm{fm}$ and an older one $0.88\\,\\mathrm{fm}$, and the cause is not identified.","posed_since":"2019","precise":"The rms charge radius $r_{p} = 0.84087(39)\\, \\mathrm{fm}$ from the muonic hydrogen Lamb shift (2013) agrees with hydrogen $2\\mathrm{S}-6\\mathrm{P}$ spectroscopy (0.8406(15) fm, Maisenbacher et al., 2026) and with PRad low-momentum-transfer e-p scattering (0.831(14) fm, 2019), whereas Mainz A1 e-p scattering gives 0.879(8) fm (2010). Identify the cause of the scattering discrepancy: radiative corrections, cross-section normalization, or the functional form used to extrapolate $G_{E}(Q^{2})$ to $Q^{2} = 0$. The remaining spectroscopic outliers (LKB $1\\mathrm{S}-3\\mathrm{S}$, 0.877(13) fm, 2018; Colorado State $2\\mathrm{S}-8\\mathrm{D}$, about 0.86 fm, 2022) are a question of hydrogen line shapes and QED corrections and are treated as an atomic-physics problem. Answer: the identified systematic effect, shown by reanalysis or new data that bring the scattering values into agreement.","problem_ref":"d70706ea6a491562139203ee9cf03558b01ce2b06a2e5621a4836a2dfa7a981c","references":"","settled_by":"Low-momentum-transfer $\\mathrm{e}-\\mathrm{p}$ and $\\mu-\\mathrm{p}$ scattering (PRad-II, MUSE, AMBER) analyzed with a common radiative-correction and fitting treatment, together with an independent reanalysis of the Mainz A1 data.","status_note":"The MPQ hydrogen 2S-6P measurement (Maisenbacher et al., Nature 2026, arXiv 2602.14980) confirmed the small radius; the origin of the larger Mainz A1 scattering value remained unexplained as of 2026.","title":"Disagreement between electron-scattering values of the proton charge radius","topic_ref":null},"attested":{"attestation":{"batch":null,"client_id":null,"id_token_sha256":null,"kind":"platform"},"record_hash":"dc2d58caffb1e62ea817aa951f9396c251a2e089b905313f014a6dc1512abce0","schema":"pubphys.attested/1"},"envelope":{"attested_hash":"550f17e5a347971e3d89fe5d2d9c6aef1c39697812d9a80cea6be394872e4edc","platform_signature":{"key_id":"c6afc19b31429869751f06879c75cd64ea92654423d15b44be775bf1310a60da","sig":"AU1Tni_ewM-U0gAUQJxx5v4bk9OqRykOLON53BQNlN5OlcLvRwy9NVBkPj3jGgWQ57EjIVOiO27oPrnZAA5vCA"},"schema":"pubphys.envelope/1"},"record_hash":"dc2d58caffb1e62ea817aa951f9396c251a2e089b905313f014a6dc1512abce0","leaf_index":3520}