WHY ARE NUCLEI PROLATE:

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Neutron Excess Asymmetry Remember HWc 1.
Advertisements

CoulEx. W. Udo Schröder, 2012 Shell Models 2 Systematic Changes in Nuclear Shapes Møller, Nix, Myers, Swiatecki, Report LBL 1993: Calculations fit to.
Pavel Stránský 29 th August 2011 W HAT DRIVES NUCLEI TO BE PROLATE? Instituto de Ciencias Nucleares, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México Alejandro.
Emission of Scission Neutrons: Testing the Sudden Approximation N. Carjan Centre d'Etudes Nucléaires de Bordeaux-Gradignan,CNRS/IN2P3 – Université Bordeaux.
Microscopic time-dependent analysis of neutrons transfers at low-energy nuclear reactions with spherical and deformed nuclei V.V. Samarin.
Isomers and shape transitions in the n-rich A~190 region: Phil Walker University of Surrey prolate K isomers vs. oblate collective rotation the influence.
The Collective Model Aard Keimpema.
(taken from H-J. Wolesheima,
ISOLDE workshop, CERN, November 2008 Correlations between nuclear masses, radii and E0 transitions P. Van Isacker, GANIL, France Simple nuclear mass formulas.
THE FISSION BARRIERS OF SUPERHEAVY AND EXOTIC NUCLEI Fedir A. Ivanyuk 1 and Krzysztof Pomorski 2 1 Institut for Nuclear Research, Kiev, Ukraine 2 Theoretical.
Fission potential energy surfaces in ten-dimensional deformation space. Vitaly Pashkevich Joint Institute for Nuclear Research. Dubna, Russia Yuri Pyatkov.
W. Udo Schröder, 2005 Rotational Spectroscopy 1. W. Udo Schröder, 2005 Rotational Spectroscopy 2 Rigid-Body Rotations Axially symmetric nucleus 
Binding Energy 3.3 Binding Energy The binding energy of a nucleus is the energy required to separate all of the constituent nucleons from the nucleus.
NUCLEAR STRUCTURE PHENOMENOLOGICAL MODELS
SH nuclei – structure, limits of stability & high-K ground-states/isomers 1.Equilibrium shapes 2.Fission barriers 3.Q alpha of Z= ( with odd and.
1 Properties of hypernuclei in the Skyrme Hartree-Fock method Xian-Rong Zhou Department of physics, Xiamen University, Xiamen, China Present Status of.
THE SHAPE TRANSITION IN ROTATING NUCLEI F. Ivanyuk 1, K. Pomorski 2 and J.Bartel 3 1 Institut for Nuclear Research, Kiev, Ukraine 2 Theoretical Physics.
Chapter 4 The Masses of Nuclei
Nuclei with more than one valence nucleon Multi-particle systems.
Nuclear and Radiation Physics, BAU, 1 st Semester, (Saed Dababneh). 1 Nuclear Binding Energy B tot (A,Z) = [ Zm H + Nm n - m(A,Z) ] c 2 B  m.
Orbits, shapes and currents S. Frauendorf Department of Physics University of Notre Dame.
NSDD Workshop, Trieste, February 2006 Nuclear Structure (II) Collective models P. Van Isacker, GANIL, France.
Orbits, shapes and currents S. Frauendorf Department of Physics University of Notre Dame.
Statistical properties of nuclei: beyond the mean field Yoram Alhassid (Yale University) Introduction Beyond the mean field: correlations via fluctuations.
The stability of triaxial superdeformed shape in odd-odd Lu isotopes Tu Ya.
Ning Wang 1, Min Liu 1, Xi-Zhen Wu 2, Jie Meng 3 Isospin effects in nuclear mass models Nuclear Structure and Related Topics (NSRT15), , DUBNA.
Rotation and alignment of high-j orbitls in transfermium nuclei Dr. Xiao-tao He College of Material Science and Technology, Nanjing University of Aeronautics.
Ning Wang 1, Min Liu 1, Xi-Zhen Wu 2, Jie Meng 3 Isospin effect in Weizsaecker-Skyrme mass formula ISPUN14, , Ho Chi Minh City 1 Guangxi Normal.
Experimental evidence for closed nuclear shells Neutron Proton Deviations from Bethe-Weizsäcker mass formula: mass number A B/A (MeV per nucleon)
Nuclear Models Nuclear force is not yet fully understood.
10-1 Fission General Overview of Fission The Probability of Fission §The Liquid Drop Model §Shell Corrections §Spontaneous Fission §Spontaneously Fissioning.
How do nuclei rotate? The nucleus rotates as a whole.
Fission Collective Dynamics in a Microscopic Framework Kazimierz Sept 2005 H. Goutte, J.F. Berger, D. Gogny CEA Bruyères-le-Châtel Fission dynamics with.
NEUTRON SKIN AND GIANT RESONANCES Shalom Shlomo Cyclotron Institute Texas A&M University.
Lecture 23: Applications of the Shell Model 27/11/ Generic pattern of single particle states solved in a Woods-Saxon (rounded square well)
Lecture 21: On to Finite Nuclei! 20/11/2003 Review: 1. Nuclear isotope chart: (lecture 1) 304 isotopes with t ½ > 10 9 yrs (age of the earth) 177.
E. Sahin, G. de Angelis Breaking of the Isospin Symmetry and CED in the A  70 mass region: the T z =-1 70 Kr.
Nuclear and Radiation Physics, BAU, 1 st Semester, (Saed Dababneh). 1 Shell model Notes: 1. The shell model is most useful when applied to closed-shell.
Nuclear and Radiation Physics, BAU, First Semester, (Saed Dababneh). 1 Extreme independent particle model!!! Does the core really remain inert?
July 29-30, 2010, Dresden 1 Forbidden Beta Transitions in Neutrinoless Double Beta Decay Kazuo Muto Department of Physics, Tokyo Institute of Technology.
Some (more) High(ish)-Spin Nuclear Structure Paddy Regan Department of Physics Univesity of Surrey Guildford, UK Lecture 2 Low-energy.
Shape evolution of highly deformed 75 Kr and projected shell model description Yang Yingchun Shanghai Jiao Tong University Shanghai, August 24, 2009.
The i 13/2 Proton and j 15/2 Neutron Orbital and the SD Band in A~190 Region Xiao-tao He En-guang Zhao En-guang Zhao Institute of Theoretical Physics,
Quantum phase transitions and structural evolution in nuclei.
Quantum Phase Transitions in Nuclei
Gross Properties of Nuclei
 Standard Model goes pear-shaped in CERN experiment The Register  Physicists get a good look at pear-shaped atomic nuclei The Los Angeles Times  Exotic.
A FRESH LOOK AT THE SCISSION CONFIGURATION Fedir A. Ivanyuk Institut for Nuclear Research, Kiev, Ukraine Shape parameterisations The variational principle.
Variational Multiparticle-Multihole Configuration Mixing Method with the D1S Gogny force INPC2007, Tokyo, 06/06/2007 Nathalie Pillet (CEA Bruyères-le-Châtel,
Monday, Oct. 2, 2006PHYS 3446, Fall 2006 Jae Yu 1 PHYS 3446 – Lecture #8 Monday, Oct. 2, 2006 Dr. Jae Yu 1.Nuclear Models Shell Model Collective Model.
No Low-Lying Nuclear Vibrations: Configuration Dependent Pairing and Axial Asymmetry J. F. Sharpey-Schafer University of the Western Cape, South Africa.
Time dependent GCM+GOA method applied to the fission process ESNT janvier / 316 H. Goutte, J.-F. Berger, D. Gogny CEA/DAM Ile de France.
Systematical Analysis of Fast Neutron Induced Alpha Particle Emission Reaction Cross Sections Jigmeddorj Badamsambuu, Nuclear Research Center, National.
Congresso del Dipartimento di Fisica Highlights in Physics –14 October 2005, Dipartimento di Fisica, Università di Milano Contribution to nuclear.
Nuclear Phenomenology 3C24 Nuclear and Particle Physics Tricia Vahle & Simon Dean (based on Lecture Notes from Ruben Saakyan) UCL.
Pairing Evidence for pairing, what is pairing, why pairing exists, consequences of pairing – pairing gap, quasi-particles, etc. For now, until we see what.
Rotational energy term in the empirical formula for the yrast energies in even-even nuclei Eunja Ha and S. W. Hong Department of Physics, Sungkyunkwan.
超重原子核的结构 孙 扬 上海交通大学 合作者:清华大学 龙桂鲁, F. Al-Khudair 中国原子能研究院 陈永寿,高早春 济南,山东大学, 2008 年 9 月 20 日.
Determining Reduced Transition Probabilities for 152 ≤ A ≤ 248 Nuclei using Interacting Boson Approximation (IBA-1) Model By Dr. Sardool Singh Ghumman.
Shape parameterization
oblate prolate l=2 a20≠0, a2±1= a2±2= 0 Shape parameterization
Nuclear Binding Energy
PHL424: Nuclear rotation.
Emmanuel Clément IN2P3/GANIL – Caen France
Nuclear Chemistry CHEM 396 Chapter 4, Part B Dr. Ahmad Hamaed
Nuclear Physics, JU, Second Semester,
a non-adiabatic microscopic description
Parametrisation of Binding Energies
Rotational Spectroscopy
Shape-coexistence enhanced by multi-quasiparticle excitations in A~190 mass region 石跃 北京大学 导师:许甫荣教授
Presentation transcript:

WHY ARE NUCLEI PROLATE: Deformation is a collective effect Pavel Stránský Alejandro Frank Roelof Bijker Instituto de Ciencias Nucleares, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México XXXIV Symposium on Nuclear Physics, Cocoyoc, Mexico, 2011 7th January 2011

WHY ARE NUCLEI PROLATE: Deformation is a collective effect Pictures with deformation 1. Single particle x collective approaches 2. Deformed liquid drop model Binding energy (Mass formula) Quadrupole deformation Shape stabilization: Shell corrections Results Prolate-oblate energy difference for experimental data of electric quadrupole moments and B(E2) transitions

Single-particle x collective approaches Microscopic – Nilsson model (1 slide) Chocolate (chocolate – nahuatl) box (1 slide) Adiabatic approximation (1 slide) Deformation – collective effect Collective approaches – too small??? (1 slide)

Single-particle description Collective excitations 1. Single-particle models Single-particle description Collective excitations Nillson-like models deformed liquid drop models Stable ground-state configuration Minimization of the total sum of the lowest-lying occupied one-particle energies with respect to the size of the potential deformation Minimization of the equilibrium energy with respect to the size of the shape deformation

Chocolate-box model y x = y x z Spectrum: Volume conservation: 1. Single-particle models Chocolate-box model a demonstration of the single-particle approach y x = y x z Spectrum: Volume conservation: xyz = const. deformation parameter

Chocolate-box model – Nilsson diagram 1. Single-particle models Chocolate-box model – Nilsson diagram E oblate d prolate

Each level is occupied by 1 particle only 1. Single-particle models Chocolate-box model – Level occupation N = 8 Each level is occupied by 1 particle only Total energy E d

Chocolate-box model – Level occupation 1. Single-particle models Chocolate-box model – Level occupation N = 8 Total energy E d

Chocolate-box model – Level occupation 1. Single-particle models Chocolate-box model – Level occupation N = 8 Total energy E d

Chocolate-box model – Level occupation 1. Single-particle models Chocolate-box model – Level occupation N = 8 Total energy E d

Chocolate-box model – Level occupation 1. Single-particle models Chocolate-box model – Level occupation N = 8 Total energy E d

Chocolate-box model – Level occupation 1. Single-particle models Chocolate-box model – Level occupation N = 8 Total energy E d

Chocolate-box model – Level occupation 1. Single-particle models Chocolate-box model – Level occupation N = 8 Total energy E d

Chocolate-box model – Level occupation 1. Single-particle models Chocolate-box model – Level occupation N = 8 Total energy E d

Chocolate-box model – Level occupation 1. Single-particle models Chocolate-box model – Level occupation N = 8 Total energy E d

Chocolate-box model – Level occupation 1. Single-particle models Chocolate-box model – Level occupation N = 8 Total energy E d

Chocolate-box model – Level occupation 1. Single-particle models Chocolate-box model – Level occupation N = 8 Total energy E d

Chocolate-box model – Adiabatic approximation 1. Single-particle models Chocolate-box model – Adiabatic approximation This approximation allows us to determine the shape for a given particle number N uniquely Procedure: Lowest single-particle levels are occupied for small deformation |d| Deformation is then changed “adiabatically”, making the particles stay on the same levels as in the beginning, no matter if there happens to appear another level with lower energy Total energy under this approximation has always 1 (spherical) or 2 (deformed) minima; the deeper minimum determines the shape

Chocolate-box model – Adiabatic approximation 1. Single-particle models Chocolate-box model – Adiabatic approximation N = 8 E d

Chocolate-box model – Adiabatic approximation 1. Single-particle models Chocolate-box model – Adiabatic approximation N = 8 E d

Chocolate-box model – Adiabatic approximation 1. Single-particle models Chocolate-box model – Adiabatic approximation N = 8 E d

Chocolate-box model – Adiabatic approximation 1. Single-particle models Chocolate-box model – Adiabatic approximation N = 8 E d

Chocolate-box model – Adiabatic approximation 1. Single-particle models Chocolate-box model – Adiabatic approximation N = 8 E d

Chocolate-box model – Adiabatic approximation 1. Single-particle models Chocolate-box model – Adiabatic approximation N = 8 E d

Chocolate-box model – Adiabatic approximation 1. Single-particle models Chocolate-box model – Adiabatic approximation N = 8 E d

Chocolate-box model – Adiabatic approximation 1. Single-particle models Chocolate-box model – Adiabatic approximation N = 8 E d

Chocolate-box model – Adiabatic approximation 1. Single-particle models Chocolate-box model – Adiabatic approximation N = 8 E d

Adiabatic approximation 1. Single-particle models Chocolate-box model – shapes particle number N Adiabatic approximation d deformation

Chocolate-box model – prolate-oblate assymetry 1. Single-particle models Chocolate-box model – prolate-oblate assymetry Oblate: beginnings of the “shells” Prolate: ends of the “shells”

Chocolate-box model Spheroidal cavity d 1. Single-particle models Chocolate-box model Spheroidal cavity d I. Hamamoto and B.R. Mottelson, Phys. Rev. C 79, 034317 (2009)

2. Deformed liquid drop model Principal terms of the spherical LDM + improvements (1 slide) (curvature as a surface term of higher order) Deformation, quadrupole deformation (1 slide) Prolate – oblate energy difference Prolate – always favored. Shape stabilization by shell corrections (basics of microscopic structure included) (1 slide) 2. Deformed liquid drop model

Total mass/energy (Weizsäcker formula) 2. Liquid drop model Total mass/energy (Weizsäcker formula) microscopic corrections (shell effects, pairing) binding energy A = N + Z curvature energy, surface and volume redistribution energy… volume energy surface energy Coulomb energy Adjustable constants: Shape functions: W.D. Myers, W.J. Swiatecki, Nucl. Phys. 81, 1 (1966)

Fixed by a condition of volume conservation 2. Liquid drop model Quadrupole deformation (axially symmetric) Fixed by a condition of volume conservation a2 = 0 a2 > 0 a2 < 0 spherical oblate prolate Surface shape functions: Coulomb

Quadrupole deformation – shape functions 2. Liquid drop model Quadrupole deformation – shape functions Surface Coulomb shape functions:

Negative for a2 < 0 – prolate shape has always lower energy 2. Liquid drop model Quadrupole deformation – shape functions Symmetric with respect to the sign of a2 Surface Coulomb shape functions: Negative for a2 < 0 – prolate shape has always lower energy Deformation parameter Values of the coefficients

Necessity of introducing microscopic effect 2. Liquid drop model Shape stabilization Pure liquid drop model is not able to explain ground state deformation (spherical shape is always preferred) Necessity of introducing microscopic effect Shell effects Symmetric with respect to the sign of the deformation W.D. Myers, W.J. Swiatecki, Nucl. Phys. 81, 1 (1966)

Shell corrections Mid-shell correction < 3MeV 40 80 120 2. Liquid drop model Shell corrections Mid-shell correction < 3MeV 40 80 120 Shell corrections are highly important near closed shells, but less for deformed nuclei in mid-shells W.D. Myers, W.J. Swiatecki, Nucl. Phys. 81, 1 (1966)

3. Prolate-oblate energy difference from experiments

Electric quadrupole moment 3. Numerical results Electric quadrupole moment Deformation parameter: measured intrinsic where rare-earth region is a typical value for well-deformed nuclei N.J. Stone, At. Data Nucl. Data Tables 90, 75 (2005)

Prolate-oblate energy difference 3. Numerical results Prolate-oblate energy difference

Prolate-oblate energy difference 3. Numerical results Prolate-oblate energy difference rare-earth region

Almost the same contribution 3. Numerical results Prolate-oblate energy difference surface surface Almost the same contribution Coulomb Coulomb

Distribution of DB values 3. Numerical results Distribution of DB values 495 nuclei totally

B(E2) transition probabilities 3. Numerical results B(E2) transition probabilities Only absolute value of the deformation Only even-even nuclei S. Raman, C.W. Nestor, and P. Tikkanen, At. Data Nucl. Data Tables 78, 1 (2001)

Thank you for your attention Last slide Conclusions Predominance of prolate states can be explained by a simple deformed liquid drop model. This approach is robust with a transparent physical understanding, in contrast with single particle studies that require fine-tunning procedures and are strongly model dependent. Prolate-oblate energy difference of the order of DB = 500keV is high enough to be considered as non-negligible (for comparison, first 2+ excited state for well-deformed even-even nuclei is typically of the order of 100keV). Microscopic shell effects are necessary to stabilize deformed shape, but in most cases the prolate-oblate asymmetry in energy they give is not strong enough to compete with collective effects. Thank you for your attention