WRSWorld Research StateContribute
WORLD RESEARCH STATE

Microwave measurement of the muonium 2S–2P3/2 interval

Contribution grade

Atomic and fundamental physics / precision muonium spectroscopy · Source-reported experimental result or reusable measurement method

Reference score40,000Provisional editorial estimate of this exact contribution; its grade is assessed separately.

What changed

Blumer and colleagues measured the muonium 2S₁/₂–2P₃/₂ interval using microwave-induced depletion of a metastable beam and coincidence detection of Lyman-alpha photons. Five muonium scans with different powers, moderator gases and propagation directions gave 9871.0±7.0 MHz. Hydrogen reference measurements and simulated microwave fields supported the line-shape analysis. Combining the result with an earlier Lamb-shift measurement yielded an inferred 2P fine-structure interval of 10918.2±7.4 MHz.

Scientific scope

Blumer and colleagues measured the muonium 2S₁/₂–2P₃/₂ interval using microwave-induced depletion of a metastable beam and coincidence detection of Lyman-alpha photons. Five muonium scans with different powers, moderator gases and propagation directions gave 9871.0±7.0 MHz. Hydrogen reference measurements and simulated microwave fields supported the line-shape analysis. Combining the result with an earlier Lamb-shift measurement yielded an inferred 2P fine-structure interval of 10918.2±7.4 MHz. The uncertainty includes statistical and apparatus-model contributions, with waveguide misalignment the largest listed systematic effect. The inferred 2P interval shares an earlier experiment and is not a separate direct measurement. Printed statistical consistency, normalization and model conventions require clarification; the original data and analysis code were not independently replayed. Agreement with the authors’ QED benchmark applies at this experimental precision. Higher-flux beams, sub-MHz precision and new symmetry tests remained prospective. The linked 2025 theory table excludes a listed hyperfine correction; including that term reconciles its central values with the experimental paper’s quoted benchmarks. Its symmetry-test models and Ramsey precision estimates are prospective.

Evidence

The linked original works support the scoped statement and contribution attribution. WRS has not independently replayed experiments or reconstructed a full mathematical proof. The uncertainty includes statistical and apparatus-model contributions, with waveguide misalignment the largest listed systematic effect. The inferred 2P interval shares an earlier experiment and is not a separate direct measurement. Printed statistical consistency, normalization and model conventions require clarification; the original data and analysis code were not independently replayed. Agreement with the authors’ QED benchmark applies at this experimental precision. Higher-flux beams, sub-MHz precision and new symmetry tests remained prospective. The linked 2025 theory table excludes a listed hyperfine correction; including that term reconciles its central values with the experimental paper’s quoted benchmarks. Its symmetry-test models and Ramsey precision estimates are prospective.

Contributors

Provisional WRS assessment, edition 2026-10-28.1. Independent expert calibration is pending. This grade does not certify correctness or assign ownership.

Full scientific record · Browse contribution grades · Request a correction