
Measured proton electromagnetic structure deviates
from theoretical predictions
R. Li1, N. Sparveris1,**, H. Atac1, M.K. Jones2, M. Paolone3, Z. Akbar17, C. Ayerbe
Gayoso8, V. Berdnikov5, D.Biswas6,19, M. Boer1,19, A. Camsonne2, J. -P. Chen2, M.
Diefenthaler2, B. Duran 1, D. Dutta 7, D. Gaskell 2, O. Hansen 2, F. Hauenstein 9, N.
Heinrich 10, W. Henry 2, T. Horn 5, G.M. Huber 10, S. Jia 1, S. Joosten 11, A. Karki 7, S.J.D.
Kay 10, V. Kumar 10, X. Li 16, W.B. Li 8, A. H. Liyanage 6, S. Malace 2, P. Markowitz 4, M.
McCaughan 2, Z.-E. Meziani 11, H. Mkrtchyan 12, C. Morean 13, M. Muhoza 5, A. Narayan 14,
B. Pasquini 15,18, M. Rehfuss 1, B. Sawatzky 2, G.R. Smith 2, A. Smith 16, R. Trotta 5, C.
Yero 4, X. Zheng 17, and J. Zhou 16
List of affiliations*
ABSTRACT
The visible world is founded on the proton, the only composite building block of matter that is stable in nature. Consequently,
understanding the formation of matter relies on explaining the dynamics and the properties of the proton’s bound state. A
fundamental property of the proton involves the system’s response to an external electromagnetic (EM) field. It is characterized
by the EM polarizabilities
1
that describe how easily the charge and magnetization distributions inside the system are distorted
by the EM field. Moreover, the generalized polarizabilities
2
map out the resulting deformation of the densities in a proton subject
to an EM field. They reveal essential information regarding the underlying system dynamics and provide a key for decoding the
proton structure in terms of the theory of the strong interaction that binds its elementary quark and gluon constituents together.
Of particular interest is a puzzle in the proton’s electric generalized polarizability that remains unresolved for two decades
2
.
Here we report measurements of the proton’s EM generalized polarizabilities at low four-momentum transfer squared. We
show evidence of an anomaly to the behaviour of the proton’s electric generalized polarizability that contradicts the predictions
of nuclear theory and we derive its signature in the spatial distribution of the induced polarization in the proton. The reported
measurements suggest the presence of a novel, not yet understood dynamical mechanism in the proton and present significant
challenges to the nuclear theory.
Explaining how the nucleons - protons and neutrons -
emerge from the dynamics of their quark and gluon con-
stituents is a central goal of modern nuclear physics. The im-
portance of the question arises from the fact that the nucleons
account for 99% of the visible matter in the universe. More-
over, the proton holds a unique role of being nature’s only
stable composite building block. The dynamics of quarks
and gluons is governed by quantum chromodynamics (QCD),
the theory of the strong interaction. The application of pertur-
bation methods renders aspects of QCD calculable at large
energies and momenta - namely at high four-momentum
transfer squared (
Q2
) - and offers a reasonable understanding
of the nucleon structure at that scale. Nevertheless, in order
to explain the emergence of nucleon’s fundamental proper-
ties from the interactions of it’s constituents, the dynamics
of the system have to be understood at long distances (or low
Q2
), where the QCD coupling constant
αs
becomes large
and the application of perturbative QCD is not possible. The
challenge arises from the fact that QCD is a highly nonlinear
theory, since the gluons - the carriers of the strong force -
couple directly to other gluons. Here, theoretical calculations
can rely on lattice QCD
3
, a space-time discretization of the
theory based on the fundamental quark and gluon degrees
of freedom, starting from the original QCD Lagrangian. An
alternative path is offered by effective field theories (EFTs),
such as the chiral effective field theory
4–6
, which employ
hadronic degrees of freedom and is based on the approxi-
mate and spontaneously broken chiral symmetry of QCD.
*1
Temple University, Philadelphia, PA 19122, USA.
2
Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility, VA, USA.
3
New Mexico State University, Las
Cruces, NM 88003, USA.
4
Florida International University, University Park, Florida 33199, USA.
5
Catholic University of America , Washington, DC 20064.
6
Hampton University , Hampton, VA 23669.
7
Mississippi State University, Miss. State, MS 39762.
8
The College of William and Mary, Williamsburg, VA
23185.
9
Old Dominion University, Norfolk, VA 23529.
10
University of Regina, Regina, SK S4S 0A2, Canada.
11
Argonne National Laboratory, Lemont, IL
60439.
12
Artem Alikhanian National Laboratory, Yerevan, Armenia.
13
University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN 37996.
14
Veer Kunwar Singh University,
Arrah, Bihar 802301, India.
15
University of Pavia, 27100 Pavia PV, Italy.
16
Duke University, Durham, NC 27708.
17
University of Virginia, Charlottesville,
VA, 22904.
18
INFN, 27100 Pavia (PV), Italy.
19
Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State University, Blacksburg, Virginia 24061, USA.
∗∗
corresponding author:
sparveri@temple.edu
arXiv:2210.11461v1 [nucl-ex] 20 Oct 2022