arxiv: v1 [nucl-th] 15 Jan 2015
|
|
- Marjory Lindsey
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Accuracy of the new pairing theory and its improvement L. Y. Jia, Department of Physics, University of Shanghai for Science and Technology, Shanghai 93, P. R. China Department of Physics, Hebei Normal University, Shijiazhuang, Hebei 54, P. R. China (Dated: September 6, 8) Recently I proposed[] a new method for solving the pairing Hamiltonian with the pair-condensate wavefunction ansatz based on the Heisenberg equations of motion for the density matrix operators. In this work an improved version is given by deriving the relevant equations more carefully. I evaluate both versions in a large ensemble with random interactions, and the accuracy of the methods is given statistically in terms of root-mean-square derivations from the results. The widely used variational calculation is also done and the results and computing-time costs are compared. arxiv:5.3684v [nucl-th] 5 Jan 5 PACS numbers:.6.ev,..re, Keywords: I. INTRODUCTION Pairing correlation has long been recognized in nuclei [] and influences all the properties of the latter, such as mass, gap of excitation energy, and moment of inertia [3]. In general, any mean-field treatment of the nuclei needs to account it somehow to get reasonable results. Among the methods [4] the most popular one may be the Bardeen-Cooper-Schrieffer (BCS) theory [5], or its advanced version the Hartree-Fock-Bogoliubov(HBF) theory [3], where pairing correlation is considered by introducing quasi-particles and writing the ground state as a vacuum of the latter. But there are disadvantages of breaking the particle number and need for a unphysical minimum pairing strength [6, 7]. A common improvement is to use the pair-condensate [Eq. (), the BCS wavefunction projected onto good particle number] as the ground state wavefunction [8]. Usually the criteria to determine the variational parameters is minimizing the energy in the variation principle (variation after projection BCS) [8 3]. In Ref. [] I proposed a new criteria based on the Heisenberg equations of motion (EOM) for density matrix operators, as the lowest-order (mean-field) results of the generalized density matrix (GDM) formalism [4 ]. The method was applied to the calcium isotopes with the well known FPD6 interaction []. In this work I give an improved version of the method. In Ref. [] the relevant equations are derived assuming that neighboring even-even nuclei have the same Hartree- Fock (HF) single-particle energies and occupation numbers; here I do it more carefully allowing the latters to be different. To see the validity of the approaches, both versions are applied to a large ensemble with examples and random interactions; the results are good in almost all the examples. I also compare the results and necessary computing-time costs with those of the variation principle. In Sec. II I derive the improved version of the GDM pairing theory. Then in Sec. III the approaches are evaluated in the large random ensemble. Finally Sec. IV summarizes the work and discusses further directions. II. FORMALISM The pairing theory in Ref. [] was derived as the lowest-order (mean-field) results of the complete GDM formalism. In fact the derivation could be simpler and more clear if we focus on the mean fields and do not introduce collective (quadrupole) phonons. Also, in Ref. [] I made the assumption that neighboring even-even nuclei have the same HF single-particle energies and occupation numbers. Below I derive an improved version of the pairing theory abandoning the above assumption. As before, the ground state of the N-particle system is assumed to be an N-pair condensate, φ N = χn (P ) N, () where χ N is the normalization factor, and P is the pair creation operator P = v a. () a In Eq. () the summation runs over the entire singleparticle space. is the time-reversed level of the singleparticle level. The pair structure v are parameters to be determined by the theory. With the antisymmetrized fermionic Hamiltonian H = ǫ a a + V 34 a 4 a a 3a 4, (3) 34 I calculate the Heisenberg equations of motion for the density matrix operators R a a and K a a, [R,H] = [ǫ,r] V 543 a 5 a 4 a 3a + V 345 a a 3 a 4a 5, (4) [K,H] = (ǫk) (ǫk) + V 34 K V 543 a 5 a 4a 3 a + V 543 a 5 a 4a 3 a. (5)
2 Terms on the right-hand sides of Eqs. (4) and (5) are read as matrix multiplications; for example, [ǫ,r] = (ǫr) (Rǫ) = 3 ǫ 3R 3 3 R 3ǫ 3. On the pair condensate (), the density matrices are diagonal : ρ N φ N a a φ N = δ n N, (6) κ N φ N a a φ N = δ sn. (7) In practical shell-model calculations usually each singleparticle level has distinct spin and parity, thus the mean fields are also diagonal : f N ǫ + V 43 ρ N 34 = δ e N, 34 (8) δ N V 34 κ N 43 gn. (9) 34 The pairing mean field δ N should not be mixed with the Kronecker delta δ. Now I take matrix elements of the equations of motion between the pairing ground states (): equation (4) between those of the same nuclei ( φ N and φ N ); equation (5) between those of neighboring even-even nuclei ( φ N and φ N ). On the left-hand side of Eq. (5) we have φ N [K,H] φ N = φ N K H φ N φ N HK φ N (E N E N )κ N, where E N and E N are the ground state energies, H φ N E N φ N and H φ N E N φ N. Similarly for Eq. (4) we have φ N [R,H] φ N (E N E N )ρ N =. On the right-hand sides the two-body density matrices are approximated in the following way: φ N a 4 a 3 a a φ N φ N a 4 a φ N φ N a 3 a φ N φ N a 4 a φ N φ N a 3 a φ N + φ N a 4 a 3 φ N φ N a a φ N, = ρ N 4ρ N 3 ρ N 4ρ N 3 +κ N 34 κn, () φ N a 4 a 3a a φ N φ N a 4 a φ N φ N a 3 a φ N φ N a 4 a φ N φ N a 3 a φ N + φ N a 4 a 3 φ N φ N a a φ N = ρ N 4 κ N 3 ρ N 4 κ N 3 +ρ N 34 κ N. () Equations () and () would be if the ground states were taken as single-particle Slater determinants: the right-hand sides were just the fully contracted terms in Wick s theorem. Here they are approximations because the ground states are taken as pair condensates (). Finally Eqs. (4) and (5) become = [f N,ρ N ] κ N δ N +δ Nκ N, () (E N E N )κ N = f N κ N +κ N f T N +δ N δ N ρ T N ρ N δ N. (3) Under the diagonal properties(6), (7), (8), and(9), Eq. () is satisfied automatically, and Eq. (3) becomes E N E N = e N +g N n N. (4) Equation (4) is the main equation of the improved theory. It implies that the right-hand side is independent of the single-particle label, by which the parameters v in Eq. () are fixed. The main equation of the old theory, Eq. (9) in Ref. [], corresponds to replacing e N and n N by e N and n N. Equation (4) includes the wellknown particle-particle random phase approximation [7] as its special case of N = (n =, e = ǫ). The normalization factor χ N (), occupation numbers n N (6), pair-transfer amplitudes s N (7), mean fields en (8) and g N (9) are functions of the pair structures v (); their functional forms, as the kinematics of the system, have already been given in Eqs. (3) and (4) of Ref. [] and are not repeated here. In the next section I take the pairing Hamiltonian: ǫ = δ ǫ, V 34 = δ δ 3 4 G 3 (5) in Eq. (3). Consequently the mean fields (8) and (9) become e N = ǫ G n N, gn = G s N. (6) I apply both versions of the theory to a large random ensemble; for convenience I call Eq. (4) the GDM pairing theory, and Eq. (9) in Ref. [] the GDM pairing theory. s N III. RANDOM ENSEMBLE The GDM theorywasapplied in Ref. [] to calcium isotopes with the FPD6 interaction and the results are good. Here I would like to consider both the GDM and GDM theories in a large ensemble with random interactions; consequently we can speak statistically the accuracy of the theories in terms of the root-mean-square derivations from the results. The variational calculation with the trial wavefunction () is also performed and the accuracy and computing-time cost are compared. The random ensemble has examples with different parameters determined in the following way. For each example, I first pick up the single-particle levels randomly from the pool j =,3,5,7,9,,3. Each angular momentum j has a 4% probability of being selected; the selected ones (at least two) constitute the model space. Second, the single-particle energies ǫ (5) are determined randomly following the uniform distribution from MeV to. Third, I pick up the pairing strength G max as a random number following the uniform distribution from to MeV, then the pairing matrix elements G (5) are distributed uniformly from
3 3 to G max. Finally, the number of pairs N is determined following the uniform distribution from to Ω, where Ω = j (j+) is the maximal particle number allowed by the model space. I perform four sets of calculations for the ensemble: two GDM calculations GDM and GDM, variational calculation VAR, and the calculation. (In this work the calculation is done by diagonalization in spaces with fixed seniority [, 3]. It can also be achieved by the Monte Carlo algorithm [4 6]; or the Richardson s method in some special cases [7 9].) For the variational calculation of the pair-transfer amplitudes s = φ N a a φ N (7), I show two sets of results. In VAR the pair structure v () in φ N and φ N are the same, given by minimizing φ N H φ N ; while in VAR v in φ N and φ N are different, given by minimizing φ N H φ N and φ N H φ N, respectively. In Figs. and I show the complete spectroscopic results for the ensemble. For example, in panel of Fig. there are 354 points (crosses), corresponding to the 354 single-particle levels in the examples of the ensemble. The horizontal coordinate of each point is the value of n of the corresponding single-particle level, while the vertical coordinate is the GDM value. Thus a perfect calculation would have all the points lying onthe y = xstraightline. Similarly, in panels and of Fig. the vertical coordinates are the GDM and VAR values of n, respectively. Figure is plotted in the same way for the pair-transfer amplitudes s. From Figs. and we see that the variational calculation for n and the VAR version of s are generally better than the GDM ones. However, the less-careful VAR calculation of s is worse than the GDM ones. The rootmean-square (σ) derivations from the results are σ GDM n on Fig. and =., σ GDM n σs GDM σs VAR =.88, σ VAR n =.45,(7) =.7, σs GDM =.9, =.373, σs VAR =.9, (8) on Fig.. We note that on Fig. there is a point much worse than others for all the calculations, so let us look at the particular example it belongs to. This example has N = particles on two single-particle levels with angular momenta j = 5, 9 and energies ǫ5 = 8.988, ǫ9 = 9.39 MeV. The pairing two-body matrix elements are G5 =.45,,5 G9 =.456, and,9 G5 =,9 G9 =.6 MeV. The failed point corresponds to the j = 5,5 level. This example is particular in that ǫ5 ǫ9 G5,5 G9,9 G5, thus,9 there is little correlation between the two levels. I have looked at the wavefunction of the daughter nucleus and it is mainly P 5 (P 9 ) 4, which is not representable by Eq. (). Without this example, the root-meansquare derivations for the pair-transfer amplitudes s are σs GDM σ VAR =.77, σ GDM s =.63, σ VAR s =.35, and s =.79. The necessary formula for the GDM and variational calculations were given in Ref. []. In general, in large model spaces the GDM calculation costs less time than the variational one, by a factor of the number of nondegenerate single-particle levels (in order of magnitude), because the former needs to calculate only φ N P φ N while the latter needs φ N P P φ N (P a ). However, as we can see from Figs. and and Eqs. (7) and a (8), the accuracy of the GDM method is close to that of the variational one. The reduction of time cost may be a big advantage when doing ab-initio mean-field calculations for medium and heavy nuclei, especially if we were fitting parameters of the interaction (for example the effort in developing density functionals with spectroscopic accuracy). Next I would like to see the accuracy of the methods depending on different quantities. For this purpose I plot the root-mean-square derivations of n and s as functions of the single-particle angular momentum j, particle number N, and pairing strength G max in Figs. 3, 4, and 5, respectively. We have the following observations:. From Figs. 3 and 4 we see that as a trend the GDM results improve with increasing j and N, which should be expected because the GDM formalism is a collective theory.. There seems to be no obvious trend with the pairing strength shown in Fig On Fig. 4, the GDM calculation for N =, which is the particle-particle random phase approximation, is much better than the GDM calculation. And for small N (until N = 6), the GDM s seems to be slightly better than the GDM s. 4. On Fig. 3, the GDM s is slightly better than the GDM s at the smallest angular momenta j = and 3. For these levels the difference n N n N, which is inversely proportional to j around the Fermi surface, is largest; and the GDM theory with n N seems to be slightly better than the GDM one with n N. 5. The GDM n seems to be consistently better than the GDM n and the reason is still unclear. 6. In panel of Figs. 3, 4, and 5 the worst points are at j = 5, N = 6, and.5 MeV < G max <.6 MeV, respectively; because these three sub-groups contain the worst example mentioned below Eq. (8). At last in Fig. 6 I show the results for the ground state energy by different calculations. In panel there are points (crosses), corresponding to the examples of the ensemble. The horizontal coordinate of each point is the pairing correlation energy of the corresponding example, E pair ǫ n F E shell, where E shell is the ground state energy of the shell model calculation, and n F = or is the occupation number of the naive Fermi distribution. The vertical coordinate shows the variational ground state energy measured from the one, E var = φ var N H φvar N E shell, where φ var N is the pair condensate () with its pair structure v () determined by the variation principle. Similarly for panels and, but the vertical co-
4 4 ordinates are the ground state energies of the GDM and GDM calculations, respectively, measured from the one (E GDM = φ GDM N H φ GDM N E shell and E GDM = φ GDM N H φ GDM N E shell ). We see that all the three calculations give good ground state energies: the errors are small relative to the pairing correlation energy. The average values are Ēvar =.45, Ē GDM =.6, Ē GDM =.7, and Ēpair = 3.64 MeV. It is well known that the variational calculation finds the best and lowest ground state energy for a set of restricted wavefunctions of the form (). However, from the above average values we see that the energies of the GDM wavefunctions φ GDM N and φ GDM N are close to the variational minimum φ var N H φvar N. IV. SUMMARY In summary, I derive a physically improved version of the GDM pairing theory proposed in Ref. []. Both versions are checked in a large random ensemble, and the accuracy is given statistically in terms of root-meansquare derivations from the results. Consequently, we could consider the theories to be correct and apply them with confidence to realistic systems. Based on the results, the GDM theories are not as accurate as (although close to) the variation principle. However, the reduction of computing-time cost is huge for large model spaces (by a factor of the number of non-degenerate single-particle levels). This should be interesting for ab-initio mean-field calculations of medium and heavy nuclei (especially if deformed Nilsson singleparticle levels were used), or the effort in fitting parameters of an interaction. Comparingthe twoversionsofthe GDM theory, we see that in general the new one (physically more reasonable) is slightly better in calculating pair-transfer amplitudes s, while theoldoneproducesbetteroccupationnumbers n and slightly better ground state energy. The reason for the latter is still unclear. The key approximation of the current GDM methods is the factorization or linearization of the two-body density matrix on the pair condensate [Eqs. () and ()]. It would be interesting to see its validity in other circumstances, in particular, whether we could use it in the variational formalism when calculating the twobody part of the average energy, which would reduce the time cost to the same level of the current GDM methods. Support is acknowledged from the startup funding for new faculty member in University of Shanghai for Science and Technology. The numerical calculations of this work are done at the High Performance Computing Center of Michigan State University. [] L. Y. Jia, Phys. Rev. C 88, 4433 (3). [] A. Bohr, B. R. Mottelson, and D. Pines, Phys. Rev., 936 (958). [3] S. T. Belyaev, K. Dan. Vidensk. Selsk. Mat. Fys. Medd. 3, () (959). [4] Ricardo A Broglia, and Vladimir Zelevinsky, Fifty Years of Nuclear BCS: Pairing in Finite Systems (World Scientific, 3). [5] J. Bardeen, L. N. Cooper, and J. R. Schrieffer, Phys. Rev. 6, 6 (957); Phys. Rev. 8, 75 (957). [6] A. Bohr and B. Mottelson, Nuclear Structure (Benjamin, New York, 975). [7] P. Ring and P. Schuck, The Nuclear Many-Body Problem (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 98). [8] K. Dietrich, H. J. Mang, and J. H. Pradal, Phys. Rev. 35, B (964). [9] L.M. Robledo, G.F. Bertsch, arxiv: [nucl-th] (). [] H. Flocard and N. Onishi, Annals of Physics 54, 75 (997). [] Fabian Braun and Jan von Delft, Phys. Rev. Lett. 8, 47 (998). [] J. Dukelsky and G. Sierra, Phys. Rev. B 6, 3 (). [3] Jan von Delft and D.C. Ralph, Physics Reports 345, 6 (). [4] A. Kerman and A. Klein, Phys. Rev. 3, 36 (963). [5] S.T. Belyaev and V.G. Zelevinsky, Yad. Fiz., 74 (97) [Sov. J. Nucl. Phys., 46 (97)]; Yad. Fiz. 6, 95 (97) [Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 6, 657 (973)]; Yad. Fiz. 7, 55 (973) [Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 7, 69 (973)]. [6] V.G. Zelevinsky, Prog. Theor. Phys. Suppl , 5 (983). [7] M.I. Shtokman, Yad. Fiz., 479 (975) [Sov. J. Nucl. Phys., 47 (976)]. [8] L. Y. Jia, Phys. Rev. C 84, 438 (). [9] L. Y.Jia, and V.G. Zelevinsky,Phys. Rev. C84, 643 (). [] L. Y.Jia, and V.G. Zelevinsky,Phys. Rev. C86, 435 (). [] W.A. Richter, M.G. Van Der Merwe, R.E. Julies, and B.A. Brown, Nucl. Phys. A53, 35 (99). [] H. Molique and J. Dudek, Phys. Rev. C 56, 795 (997). [3] V. Zelevinsky and A. Volya, Nucl. Phys. A75, 35 (5). [4] N. Cerf and O. Martin, Phys. Rev. C 47, 6 (993); [5] N. Cerf, Nucl. Phys. A564, 383 (993). [6] Abhishek Mukherjee, Y. Alhassid, and G. F. Bertsch, Phys. Rev. C 83, 439 (). [7] R. W. Richardson, Phys. Lett. 3, 77 (963); Phys. Rev. 4, 949 (966). [8] J. Dukelsky, S. Pittel, and G. Sierra, Rev. Mod. Phys. 76, 643 (4). [9] J. Dukelsky, S. Pittel, arxiv:4.95 [nucl-th] ().
5 5 occupation numbers n GDM GDM VAR FIG. : (Color online) Occupation numbers n of all the 354 single-particle levels in the ensemble by different calculations. In panel, the single-particle levels and the points are in one-to-one correspondence, with the horizontal coordinate of the point being the n and the vertical coordinate being the GDM n. Similarly for panels and, but the vertical coordinates are n of the GDM and the variational calculations, respectively. See text for details.
6 6 pair-transfer amplitudes s GDM.5 GDM (d) VAR.5 VAR FIG. : (Color online) Pair-transfer amplitudes s of all the 354 single-particle levels in the ensemble by different calculations. The points are plotted in the same way as those in Fig. (), but for the transfer amplitudes s. Panels and (d) plot two sets of variational calculations (see text for details).
7 7 single-particle-level groups with different j group size rms n j GDM GDM VAR rms s j j GDM GDM VAR VAR FIG. 3: (Color online) Results of different calculations grouped by the single-particle-level angular momentum j. I divide all the 354 single-particle levels in the ensemble into different groups according to their angular momentum j, and panel plots the group sizes. Panel plots the root-meansquare derivations from the results of the occupation numbers n by different calculations (GDM, GDM, VAR) within each j group. Similarly, panel plots the root-meansquare derivations of the pair-transfer amplitudes s by four sets of calculations (GDM, GDM, VAR, VAR). See text for details.
8 8 sub-ensemble size rms n 5 5 sub-ensembles with different N N GDM.3 GDM VAR.. rms s N GDM GDM VAR VAR N FIG. 4: (Color online) Results of different calculations in subensembles divided by the particle number N. The examples in the ensemble are divided into sub-ensembles according to their particle number N, and panel plots the sizes of the sub-ensembles. Panels and plot the root-meansquare derivations by different calculations of the occupation numbers n and pair-transfer amplitudes s within each N sub-ensemble. See text for details.
9 9 sub-ensembles with different pairing strength sub-ensemble size G max (MeV) rms n.3.. GDM GDM VAR.5.5 G max (MeV) rms s GDM GDM VAR VAR.5.5 G max (MeV) FIG. 5: (Color online) Results of different calculations in subensembles divided by the pairing strength G max. The examples in the ensemble are divided into sub-ensembles according to their pairing strength G max, and panel plots the sizes of the sub-ensembles. Panels and plot the root-mean-square derivations by different calculations of the occupationnumbersn andpair-transferamplitudess within each sub-ensemble. See text for details.
10 ground state energies Evar (MeV) E pair (MeV) EGDM (MeV) EGDM (MeV) E pair (MeV) E pair (MeV) FIG. 6: (Color online) Ground state energies of all the examples by different calculations. In panel, the examples and the points are in one-to-one correspondence, with the horizontal coordinate of the point being the pairing correlation energy E pair, and the vertical coordinate being the variational ground state energy E var measured from the ground state energy. Similarly for panels and, but the vertical coordinates are ground state energies by the GDM and GDM calculations, respectively, measured from the ground state energy. See text for details.
Exact solution of the nuclear pairing problem
Exact solution of the nuclear pairing problem Alexander Volya, B. Alex Brown, and Vladimir Zelevinsky Department of Physics and Astronomy and National Superconducting Cyclotron Laboratory, Michigan State
More informationAPPLICATIONS OF A HARD-CORE BOSE HUBBARD MODEL TO WELL-DEFORMED NUCLEI
International Journal of Modern Physics B c World Scientific Publishing Company APPLICATIONS OF A HARD-CORE BOSE HUBBARD MODEL TO WELL-DEFORMED NUCLEI YUYAN CHEN, FENG PAN Liaoning Normal University, Department
More informationProjected shell model for nuclear structure and weak interaction rates
for nuclear structure and weak interaction rates Department of Physics, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai 200240, China E-mail: sunyang@sjtu.edu.cn The knowledge on stellar weak interaction processes
More informationNuclear physics: a laboratory for many-particle quantum mechanics or From model to theory in nuclear structure physics
Nuclear physics: a laboratory for many-particle quantum mechanics or From model to theory in nuclear structure physics G.F. Bertsch University of Washington Stockholm University and the Royal Institute
More informationSpherical-deformed shape coexistence for the pf shell in the nuclear shell model
PHYSICAL REVIEW C, VOLUME 63, 044306 Spherical-deformed shape coexistence for the pf shell in the nuclear shell model Takahiro Mizusaki, 1 Takaharu Otsuka, 2,3 Michio Honma, 4 and B. Alex Brown 5 1 Department
More informationMany-Body Problems and Quantum Field Theory
Philippe A. Martin Francois Rothen Many-Body Problems and Quantum Field Theory An Introduction Translated by Steven Goldfarb, Andrew Jordan and Samuel Leach Second Edition With 102 Figures, 7 Tables and
More informationarxiv: v1 [nucl-th] 18 Jan 2018
Nuclear deformation in the configuration-interaction shell model arxiv:181.6175v1 [nucl-th] 18 Jan 218 Y. Alhassid, 1 G.F. Bertsch 2,3 C.N. Gilbreth, 2 and M.T. Mustonen 1 1 Center for Theoretical Physics,
More informationObservables predicted by HF theory
Observables predicted by HF theory Total binding energy of the nucleus in its ground state separation energies for p / n (= BE differences) Ground state density distribution of protons and neutrons mean
More informationThe 2010 US National Nuclear Physics Summer School and the TRIUMF Summer Institute, NNPSS-TSI June 21 July 02, 2010, Vancouver, BC, Canada
TU DARMSTADT The 2010 US National Nuclear Physics Summer School and the TRIUMF Summer Institute, NNPSS-TSI June 21 July 02, 2010, Vancouver, BC, Canada Achim Richter ECT* Trento/Italy and TU Darmstadt/Germany
More informationMean field studies of odd mass nuclei and quasiparticle excitations. Luis M. Robledo Universidad Autónoma de Madrid Spain
Mean field studies of odd mass nuclei and quasiparticle excitations Luis M. Robledo Universidad Autónoma de Madrid Spain Odd nuclei and multiquasiparticle excitations(motivation) Nuclei with odd number
More informationarxiv:nucl-th/ v1 24 Aug 2005
Test of modified BCS model at finite temperature V. Yu. Ponomarev, and A. I. Vdovin Bogoliubov Laboratory of Theoretical Physics, Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, 498 Dubna, Russia Institut für Kernphysik,
More informationMICROSCOPIC CALCULATION OF COLLECTIVE HAMILTONIAN FOR COMPLEX NUCLEI. Liyuan Jia
MICROSCOPIC CALCULATION OF COLLECTIVE HAMILTONIAN FOR COMPLEX NUCLEI By Liyuan Jia A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR
More informationarxiv: v1 [nucl-th] 18 Aug 2017
Analysis of Spectroscopic Factors in 1 Be in the Nilsson Strong Coupling Limit A. O. Macchiavelli, H. L. Crawford, C. M. Campbell, R. M. Clark, M. Cromaz, P. Fallon, M. D. Jones, I. Y. Lee, M. Salathe
More informationThe structure of neutron deficient Sn isotopes
The structure of neutron deficient Sn isotopes arxiv:nucl-th/930007v 5 Oct 993 A. Holt, T. Engeland, M. Hjorth-Jensen and E. Osnes Department of Physics, University of Oslo, N-03 Oslo, Norway February
More informationMean-field concept. (Ref: Isotope Science Facility at Michigan State University, MSUCL-1345, p. 41, Nov. 2006) 1/5/16 Volker Oberacker, Vanderbilt 1
Mean-field concept (Ref: Isotope Science Facility at Michigan State University, MSUCL-1345, p. 41, Nov. 2006) 1/5/16 Volker Oberacker, Vanderbilt 1 Static Hartree-Fock (HF) theory Fundamental puzzle: The
More informationEffective shell model Hamiltonians from density functional theory: Quadrupolar and pairing correlations
PHYSICAL REVIEW C 77, 6438 (8) Effective shell model Hamiltonians from density functional theory: Quadrupolar and pairing correlations R. Rodríguez-Guzmán and Y. Alhassid * Center for Theoretical Physics,
More informationA POSSIBLE INTERPRETATION OF THE MULTIPLETS 0 + AND 2 + IN 168 Er
A POSSILE INTERPRETATION OF THE MULTIPLETS 0 + AND + IN 168 Er A. A. RADUTA 1,, F. D. AARON 1, C. M. RADUTA 1 Department of Theoretical Physics and Mathematics, ucharest University, P.O. ox MG11, Romania
More informationMedium polarization effects and pairing interaction in finite nuclei
Medium polarization effects and pairing interaction in finite nuclei S. Baroni, P.F. Bortignon, R.A. Broglia, G. Colo, E. Vigezzi Milano University and INFN F. Barranco Sevilla University Commonly used
More informationLecture 6. Fermion Pairing. WS2010/11: Introduction to Nuclear and Particle Physics
Lecture 6 Fermion Pairing WS2010/11: Introduction to Nuclear and Particle Physics Experimental indications for Cooper-Pairing Solid state physics: Pairing of electrons near the Fermi surface with antiparallel
More informationarxiv: v1 [nucl-th] 7 Nov 2018
Matrix Model With a Phase Transition Arun Kingan and Larry Zamick Department of Physics and Astronomy Rutgers University, Piscataway, New Jersey 08854 arxiv:1811.02562v1 [nucl-th] 7 Nov 2018 November 8,
More informationFIGURE 1. Excitation energy versus angular-momentum plot of the yrast structure of 32 S calculated with the Skyrme III interaction. Density distributi
KUNS1529 Exotic Shapes in 32 S suggested by the Symmetry-Unrestricted Cranked Hartree-Fock Calculations 1 Masayuki Yamagami and Kenichi Matsuyanagi Department of Physics, Graduate School of Science, Kyoto
More informationRotational Property of 249 Cm in Particle-Triaxial-Rotor Model
Commun. Theor. Phys. (0) Vol., No., February, 0 Rotational Property of 4 Cm in Particle-Triaxial-Rotor Model ZHUANG Kai ( Ô), LI Ze-Bo (ÓÃ ), and LIU Yu-Xin ( ) Department of Physics and State Key Laboratory
More informationTransition quadrupole moments in γ -soft nuclei and the triaxial projected shell model
17 May 2001 Physics Letters B 507 (2001) 115 120 www.elsevier.nl/locate/npe Transition quadrupole moments in γ -soft nuclei and the triaxial projected shell model Javid A. Sheikh a,yangsun b,c,d, Rudrajyoti
More informationProjected shell model analysis of tilted rotation
PHYSICAL REVIEW C VOLUME 57, NUMBER 1 JANUARY 1998 Projected shell model analysis of tilted rotation J. A. Sheikh, 1.2 Y. Sun, 3,4,5 and P. M. Walker 1 1 Department of Physics, University of Surrey, Surrey,
More informationarxiv:nucl-th/ v1 19 May 2004
1 arxiv:nucl-th/0405051v1 19 May 2004 Nuclear structure of 178 Hf related to the spin-16, 31-year isomer Yang Sun, a b Xian-Rong Zhou c, Gui-Lu Long, c En-Guang Zhao, d Philip M. Walker 1e a Department
More informationNuclear Level Density with Non-zero Angular Momentum
Commun. Theor. Phys. (Beijing, China) 46 (2006) pp. 514 520 c International Academic Publishers Vol. 46, No. 3, September 15, 2006 Nuclear Level Density with Non-zero Angular Momentum A.N. Behami, 1 M.
More informationarxiv: v1 [nucl-th] 19 Feb 2018
arxiv:1802.06508v1 [nucl-th] 19 Feb 2018 Key Topics in Nuclear Structure, March 2005, pp 483-494 Proceedings of the 8th International Spring Seminar on Nuclear Physics, Paestum, Italy, 23 27 May 2004 c
More informationBenchmarking the Hartree-Fock and Hartree-Fock-Bogoliubov approximations to level densities. G.F. Bertsch, Y. Alhassid, C.N. Gilbreth, and H.
Benchmarking the Hartree-Fock and Hartree-Fock-Bogoliubov approximations to level densities G.F. Bertsch, Y. Alhassid, C.N. Gilbreth, and H. Nakada 5th Workshop on Nuclear Level Density and Gamma Strength,
More informationPAIRING COHERENCE LENGTH IN NUCLEI
NUCLEAR PHYSICS PAIRING COHERENCE LENGTH IN NUCLEI V.V. BARAN 1,2, D.S. DELION 1,3,4 1 Horia Hulubei National Institute of Physics and Nuclear Engineering, 407 Atomiştilor, POB MG-6, RO-077125, Bucharest-Măgurele,
More informationComparison of Various HFB Overlap Formulae
Bulg. J. Phys. 42 (2015) 404 409 Comparison of Various HFB Overlap Formulae M. Oi Institute of Natural Sciences, Senshu University, 3-8-1 Kanda-Jinbocho, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 101-0051, Japan Received 31 October
More informationGauge Invariant Variables for SU(2) Yang-Mills Theory
Gauge Invariant Variables for SU(2) Yang-Mills Theory Cécile Martin Division de Physique Théorique, Institut de Physique Nucléaire F-91406, Orsay Cedex, France. Abstract We describe a nonperturbative calculation
More informationarxiv: v2 [nucl-th] 8 May 2014
Oblate deformation of light neutron-rich even-even nuclei Ikuko Hamamoto 1,2 1 Riken Nishina Center, Wako, Saitama 351-0198, Japan 2 Division of Mathematical Physics, Lund Institute of Technology at the
More informationJoint ICTP-IAEA Workshop on Nuclear Structure Decay Data: Theory and Evaluation August Introduction to Nuclear Physics - 1
2358-19 Joint ICTP-IAEA Workshop on Nuclear Structure Decay Data: Theory and Evaluation 6-17 August 2012 Introduction to Nuclear Physics - 1 P. Van Isacker GANIL, Grand Accelerateur National d'ions Lourds
More informationSpin Cut-off Parameter of Nuclear Level Density and Effective Moment of Inertia
Commun. Theor. Phys. (Beijing, China) 43 (005) pp. 709 718 c International Academic Publishers Vol. 43, No. 4, April 15, 005 Spin Cut-off Parameter of Nuclear Level Density and Effective Moment of Inertia
More informationThe neutron proton pairing and the moments of inertia of the rare earth even even nuclei
PRAMANA c Indian Academy of Sciences Vol. 73, No. 5 journal of November 2009 physics pp. 847 857 The neutron proton pairing and the moments of inertia of the rare earth even even nuclei A E CALIK, C DENIZ
More informationBand crossing and signature splitting in odd mass fp shell nuclei
Nuclear Physics A 686 (001) 19 140 www.elsevier.nl/locate/npe Band crossing and signature splitting in odd mass fp shell nuclei Victor Velázquez a, Jorge G. Hirsch b,,yangsun c,d a Institute de Recherches
More informationarxiv:nucl-th/ v1 27 Apr 2004
Skyrme-HFB deformed nuclear mass table J. Dobaczewski, M.V. Stoitsov and W. Nazarewicz arxiv:nucl-th/0404077v1 27 Apr 2004 Institute of Theoretical Physics, Warsaw University ul. Hoża 69, PL-00681 Warsaw,
More informationThe Nuclear Many-Body Problem. Lecture 2
The Nuclear Many-Body Problem Lecture 2 How do we describe nuclei? Shell structure in nuclei and the phenomenological shell model approach to nuclear structure. Ab-initio approach to nuclear structure.
More informationBrief historical introduction. 50th anniversary of the BCS paper. Richardson exact solution (1963) Ultrasmall superconducting grains (1999).
Brief historical introduction. 50th anniversary of the BCS paper. Richardson exact solution (1963) Ultrasmall superconducting grains (1999). Cooper pairs and pairing correlations from the exact solution
More informationThe shell model Monte Carlo approach to level densities: recent developments and perspectives
The shell model Monte Carlo approach to level densities: recent developments and perspectives Yoram Alhassid (Yale University) Introduction: the shell model Monte Carlo (SMMC) approach Level density in
More informationarxiv: v1 [nucl-th] 5 Nov 2018
Neutron width statistics using a realistic description of the neutron channel P. Fanto, G. F. Bertsch 2, and Y. Alhassid Center for Theoretical Physics, Sloane Physics Laboratory, Yale University, New
More informationnuclear level densities from exactly solvable pairing models
nuclear level densities from exactly solvable pairing models Stefan Rombouts In collaboration with: Lode Pollet, Kris Van Houcke, Dimitri Van Neck, Kris Heyde, Jorge Dukelsky, Gerardo Ortiz Ghent University
More informationHybridization of tensor-optimized and high-momentum antisymmetrized molecular dynamics for light nuclei with bare interaction
Prog. Theor. Exp. Phys. 2015, 00000 (10 pages) DOI: 10.1093/ptep/0000000000 Hybridization of tensor-optimized and high-momentum antisymmetrized molecular dynamics for light nuclei with bare interaction
More informationCorrelation energy of the pairing Hamiltonian
Nuclear Physics A 679 (000) 163 174 www.elsevier.nl/locate/npe Correlation energy of the pairing Hamiltonian K. Hagino,G.F.Bertsch 1 Institute for Nuclear Theory, Department of Physics, University of Washington,
More informationTitle. Author(s)Itagaki, N.; Oertzen, W. von; Okabe, S. CitationPhysical Review C, 74: Issue Date Doc URL. Rights.
Title Linear-chain structure of three α clusters in 13C Author(s)Itagaki, N.; Oertzen, W. von; Okabe, S. CitationPhysical Review C, 74: 067304 Issue Date 2006-12 Doc URL http://hdl.handle.net/2115/17192
More informationNucleon Pair Approximation to the nuclear Shell Model
Nucleon Pair Approximation to the nuclear Shell Model Yiyuan Cheng Department of Physics and Astronomy, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, China RCNP, Osaka university, Japan Collaborators: Yu-Min Zhao, Akito
More informationarxiv:quant-ph/ v5 10 Feb 2003
Quantum entanglement of identical particles Yu Shi Department of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics, University of Cambridge, Wilberforce Road, Cambridge CB3 0WA, United Kingdom and Theory of
More informationdoi: /PhysRevC
doi:.3/physrevc.67.5436 PHYSICAL REVIEW C 67, 5436 3 Nuclear collective tunneling between Hartree states T. Kohmura Department of Economics, Josai University, Saado 35-95, Japan M. Maruyama Department
More informationarxiv: v1 [nucl-th] 23 Jul 2018
Matrix Models of Strength Distributions Larry Zamick and Arun Kingan Department of Physics and Astronomy Rutgers University, Piscataway, New Jersey 08854 arxiv:1807.08552v1 [nucl-th] 23 Jul 2018 July 24,
More informationarxiv: v1 [nucl-th] 1 Nov 2018
Contact representation of short range correlation in light nuclei studied by the High-Momentum Antisymmetrized Molecular Dynamics arxiv:1811.00271v1 [nucl-th] 1 Nov 2018 Qing Zhao, 1, Mengjiao Lyu, 2,
More informationDirect reactions methodologies for use at fragmentation beam energies
1 Direct reactions methodologies for use at fragmentation beam energies TU Munich, February 14 th 2008 Jeff Tostevin, Department of Physics Faculty of Engineering and Physical Sciences University of Surrey,
More informationarxiv:nucl-th/ v1 28 Sep 1995
Octupole Vibrations at High Angular Momenta Takashi Nakatsukasa AECL, Chalk River Laboratories, Chalk River, Ontario K0J 1J0, Canada (Preprint : TASCC-P-95-26) arxiv:nucl-th/9509043v1 28 Sep 1995 Properties
More informationStructures and Transitions in Light Unstable Nuclei
1 Structures and Transitions in Light Unstable Nuclei Y. Kanada-En yo a,h.horiuchi b and A, Doté b a Institute of Particle and Nuclear Studies, High Energy Accelerator Research Organization, Oho 1-1, Tsukuba-shi
More informationarxiv: v1 [nucl-th] 5 Apr 2017
Quantum phase transitions and collective enhancement of level density in odd-a and odd-odd nuclei S. Karampagia a,, A. Renzaglia b, V. Zelevinsky a,b arxiv:174.161v1 [nucl-th] 5 Apr 217 a National Superconducting
More informationarxiv: v1 [nucl-th] 3 May 2018
Localization of pairing correlations in nuclei within relativistic mean field models R.-D. Lasseri and E. Khan Institut de Physique Nucléaire, Université Paris-Sud, IN2P3-CNRS, F-91406 Orsay Cedex, France
More informationPairing and ( 9 2 )n configuration in nuclei in the 208 Pb region
Pairing and ( 9 2 )n configuration in nuclei in the 208 Pb region M. Stepanov 1, L. Imasheva 1, B. Ishkhanov 1,2, and T. Tretyakova 2, 1 Faculty of Physics, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow, 119991
More informationNew T=1 effective interactions for the f 5/2 p 3/2 p 1/2 g 9/2 model space: Implications for valence-mirror symmetry and seniority isomers
PHYSICAL REVIEW C 70, 044314 (2004) New T=1 effective interactions for the f 5/2 p 3/2 p 1/2 g 9/2 model space: Implications for valence-mirror symmetry and seniority isomers A. F. Lisetskiy, 1 B. A. Brown,
More informationNuclear Spectroscopy I
Nuclear Spectroscopy I Augusto O. Macchiavelli Nuclear Science Division Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Many thanks to Rod Clark, I.Y. Lee, and Dirk Weisshaar Work supported under contract number
More informationParticle-number projection in finite-temperature mean-field approximations to level densities
Particle-number projection in finite-temperature mean-field approximations to level densities Paul Fanto (Yale University) Motivation Finite-temperature mean-field theory for level densities Particle-number
More informationShape Coexistence and Band Termination in Doubly Magic Nucleus 40 Ca
Commun. Theor. Phys. (Beijing, China) 43 (2005) pp. 509 514 c International Academic Publishers Vol. 43, No. 3, March 15, 2005 Shape Coexistence and Band Termination in Doubly Magic Nucleus 40 Ca DONG
More informationCalculations of the Decay Transitions of the Modified Pöschl-Teller Potential Model via Bohr Hamiltonian Technique
Calculations of the Decay Transitions of the Modified Pöschl-Teller Potential Model via Bohr Hamiltonian Technique Nahid Soheibi, Majid Hamzavi, Mahdi Eshghi,*, Sameer M. Ikhdair 3,4 Department of Physics,
More informationNuclear Structure (II) Collective models
Nuclear Structure (II) Collective models P. Van Isacker, GANIL, France NSDD Workshop, Trieste, March 2014 TALENT school TALENT (Training in Advanced Low-Energy Nuclear Theory, see http://www.nucleartalent.org).
More informationInterpretation of the Wigner Energy as due to RPA Correlations
Interpretation of the Wigner Energy as due to RPA Correlations arxiv:nucl-th/001009v1 5 Jan 00 Kai Neergård Næstved Gymnasium og HF Nygårdsvej 43, DK-4700 Næstved, Denmark neergard@inet.uni.dk Abstract
More information-RIGID SOLUTION OF THE BOHR HAMILTONIAN FOR = 30 COMPARED TO THE E(5) CRITICAL POINT SYMMETRY
Dedicated to Acad. Aureliu Sãndulescu s 75th Anniversary -RIGID SOLUTION OF THE BOHR HAMILTONIAN FOR = 30 COMPARED TO THE E(5) CRITICAL POINT SYMMETRY DENNIS BONATSOS 1, D. LENIS 1, D. PETRELLIS 1, P.
More informationNUCLEAR STRUCTURE AB INITIO
December, 6:8 WSPC/Trim Size: 9in x 6in for Proceedings master NUCLEAR STRUCTURE AB INITIO H. FELDMEIER AND T. NEFF Gesellschaft für Schwerionenforschung mbh Planckstr., D-69 Darmstadt, Germany E-mail:
More informationThe interacting boson model
The interacting boson model P. Van Isacker, GANIL, France Dynamical symmetries of the IBM Neutrons, protons and F-spin (IBM-2) T=0 and T=1 bosons: IBM-3 and IBM-4 The interacting boson model Nuclear collective
More informationarxiv:nucl-th/ v1 14 Apr 2003
Angular momentum I ground state probabilities of boson systems interacting by random interactions Y. M. Zhao a,b, A. Arima c, and N. Yoshinaga a, a Department of Physics, Saitama University, Saitama-shi,
More informationarxiv: v1 [nucl-th] 7 Nov 2016
Nuclear structure calculations in 20 Ne with No-Core Configuration-Interaction model arxiv:1611.01979v1 [nucl-th] 7 Nov 2016 Maciej Konieczka and Wojciech Satu la Faculty of Physics, University of Warsaw,
More informationThe interacting boson model
The interacting boson model P. Van Isacker, GANIL, France Introduction to the IBM Practical applications of the IBM Overview of nuclear models Ab initio methods: Description of nuclei starting from the
More informationarxiv:nucl-th/ v1 19 Jan 1998
The Triaxial Rotation Vibration Model in the Xe-Ba Region U. Meyer 1, Amand Faessler, S.B. Khadkikar Institute for Theoretical Physics, University of Tübingen Auf der Morgenstelle 1, D 7076 Tübingen, Germany
More informationTransverse wobbling. F. Dönau 1 and S. Frauendorf 2 1 XXX 2 Department of Physics, University of Notre Dame, South Bend, Indiana 46556
Transverse wobbling F. Dönau and S. Frauendorf XXX Department of Physics, University of Notre Dame, South Bend, Indiana 46556 PACS numbers:..re, 3..Lv, 7.7.+q II. I. INTRODUCTION TRANSVERSE AND LONGITUDINAL
More information1 Introduction. 2 The hadronic many body problem
Models Lecture 18 1 Introduction In the next series of lectures we discuss various models, in particluar models that are used to describe strong interaction problems. We introduce this by discussing the
More informationc E If photon Mass particle 8-1
Nuclear Force, Structure and Models Readings: Nuclear and Radiochemistry: Chapter 10 (Nuclear Models) Modern Nuclear Chemistry: Chapter 5 (Nuclear Forces) and Chapter 6 (Nuclear Structure) Characterization
More informationStatistical Approach to Nuclear Level Density
Statistical Approach to Nuclear Level Density R. A. Sen kov,v.g.zelevinsky and M. Horoi Department of Physics, Central Michigan University, Mount Pleasant, MI 889, USA Department of Physics and Astronomy
More informationarxiv: v1 [nucl-th] 8 Sep 2011
Tidal Waves a non-adiabatic microscopic description of the yrast states in near-spherical nuclei S. Frauendorf, Y. Gu, and J. Sun Department of Physics, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN 6556, USA
More informationSpectral Fluctuations in A=32 Nuclei Using the Framework of the Nuclear Shell Model
American Journal of Physics and Applications 2017; 5(): 5-40 http://www.sciencepublishinggroup.com/j/ajpa doi: 10.11648/j.ajpa.2017050.11 ISSN: 20-4286 (Print); ISSN: 20-408 (Online) Spectral Fluctuations
More informationNucleons in Nuclei: Interactions, Geometry, Symmetries
Nucleons in Nuclei: Interactions, Geometry, Symmetries Jerzy DUDEK Department of Subatomic Research, CNRS/IN 2 P 3 and University of Strasbourg, F-67037 Strasbourg, FRANCE September 28, 2010 Mathematial
More informationv(r i r j ) = h(r i )+ 1 N
Chapter 1 Hartree-Fock Theory 1.1 Formalism For N electrons in an external potential V ext (r), the many-electron Hamiltonian can be written as follows: N H = [ p i i=1 m +V ext(r i )]+ 1 N N v(r i r j
More informationModel-independent description of nuclear rotation in an effective theory
Model-independent description of nuclear rotation in an effective theory Thomas Papenbrock and University of Aizu-JUSTIPEN-EFES Symposium on "Cutting-Edge Physics of Unstable Nuclei Aizu, November 10-13,
More informationarxiv:nucl-th/ v1 22 Jul 2004
Energy Systematics of Low-lying Collective States within the Framework of the Interacting Vector Boson Model H. G. Ganev, V. P. Garistov, A. I. Georgieva, and J. P. Draayer Institute of Nuclear Research
More informationEcole normale supérieure (ENS) de Lyon. Institut de Physique Nucléaire d Orsay. Groupe de Physique Théorique
Ecole normale supérieure (ENS) de Lyon Institut de Physique Nucléaire d Orsay Groupe de Physique Théorique Master Stage Beyond-mean-field theories and zero-range effective interactions. A way to handle
More informationJoint ICTP-IAEA Workshop on Nuclear Structure Decay Data: Theory and Evaluation August Introduction to Nuclear Physics - 2
2358-20 Joint ICTP-IAEA Workshop on Nuclear Structure Decay Data: Theory and Evaluation 6-17 August 2012 Introduction to Nuclear Physics - 2 P. Van Isacker GANIL, Grand Accelerateur National d'ions Lourds
More informationIntroduction to NUSHELLX and transitions
Introduction to NUSHELLX and transitions Angelo Signoracci CEA/Saclay Lecture 4, 14 May 213 Outline 1 Introduction 2 β decay 3 Electromagnetic transitions 4 Spectroscopic factors 5 Two-nucleon transfer/
More informationEvolution of shell structure in neutron-rich calcium isotopes
Evolution of shell structure in neutron-rich calcium isotopes G. Hagen,, M. Hjorth-Jensen,, G. R. Jansen, R. Machleidt, 5 and T. Papenbrock, Physics Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge,
More informationNuclear Structure Theory II
uclear Structure Theory II The uclear Many-body Problem Alexander Volya Florida State University Physics of light nuclei 1 H 4 Li 3 He 2 H 8 7 6 Be 5 Li 4 He 3 B H 10 9 8 7 Be 6 Li 5 He 4 B H 12 11 10
More informationNuclear structure Anatoli Afanasjev Mississippi State University
Nuclear structure Anatoli Afanasjev Mississippi State University 1. Nuclear theory selection of starting point 2. What can be done exactly (ab-initio calculations) and why we cannot do that systematically?
More informationThe Shell Model: An Unified Description of the Structure of th
The Shell Model: An Unified Description of the Structure of the Nucleus (III) ALFREDO POVES Departamento de Física Teórica and IFT, UAM-CSIC Universidad Autónoma de Madrid (Spain) TSI2015 July 2015 Understanding
More informationMoment (and Fermi gas) methods for modeling nuclear state densities
Moment (and Fermi gas) methods for modeling nuclear state densities Calvin W. Johnson (PI) Edgar Teran (former postdoc) San Diego State University supported by grants US DOE-NNSA SNP 2008 1 We all know
More informationShort-Ranged Central and Tensor Correlations. Nuclear Many-Body Systems. Reaction Theory for Nuclei far from INT Seattle
Short-Ranged Central and Tensor Correlations in Nuclear Many-Body Systems Reaction Theory for Nuclei far from Stability @ INT Seattle September 6-, Hans Feldmeier, Thomas Neff, Robert Roth Contents Motivation
More informationPhysics Letters B 695 (2011) Contents lists available at ScienceDirect. Physics Letters B.
Physics Letters B 695 (2011) 507 511 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Physics Letters B www.elsevier.com/locate/physletb Configuration interactions constrained by energy density functionals B.
More informationCharge density distributions and charge form factors of some even-a p-shell nuclei
International Journal of ChemTech Research CODEN (USA): IJCRGG, ISSN: 974-49, ISSN(Online):455-9555 Vol.1 No.6, pp 956-963, 17 Charge density distributions and charge form factors of some even-a p-shell
More informationELECTRIC MONOPOLE TRANSITIONS AND STRUCTURE OF 150 Sm
NUCLEAR PHYSICS ELECTRIC MONOPOLE TRANSITIONS AND STRUCTURE OF 150 Sm SOHAIR M. DIAB Faculty of Education, Phys. Dept., Ain Shams University, Cairo, Roxy, Egypt Received May 16, 2007 The contour plot of
More informationarxiv: v2 [nucl-th] 11 Aug 2018
New algorithm in the variation after projection calculations for non-yrast nuclear states Jia-Qi Wang, 1,2 Zao-Chun Gao, 1, Ying-Jun Ma, 2 and Y. S. Chen 1 1 China Institute of Atomic Energy, Beijing 102413,
More informationCoexistence phenomena in neutron-rich A~100 nuclei within beyond-mean-field approach
Coexistence phenomena in neutron-rich A~100 nuclei within beyond-mean-field approach A. PETROVICI Horia Hulubei National Institute for Physics and Nuclear Engineering, Bucharest, Romania Outline complex
More informationNuclear models: Collective Nuclear Models (part 2)
Lecture 4 Nuclear models: Collective Nuclear Models (part 2) WS2012/13: Introduction to Nuclear and Particle Physics,, Part I 1 Reminder : cf. Lecture 3 Collective excitations of nuclei The single-particle
More informationMixed-Mode Calculations in Nuclear Physics
Mixed-Mode Calculations in Nuclear Physics arxiv:nucl-th/0210003v1 1 Oct 2002 V. G. Gueorguiev and J. P. Draayer Department of Physics and Astronomy, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, Louisiana
More informationarxiv: v1 [nucl-th] 26 May 2009
Constraining the nuclear pairing gap with pairing vibrations E. Khan, 1 M. Grasso, 1 and J. Margueron 1 1 Institut de Physique Nucléaire, Université Paris-Sud, INP3-CNRS, F-916 Orsay Cedex, France Pairing
More informationConfiguration interaction studies of pairing and clustering in light nuclei
Configuration interaction studies of pairing and clustering in light nuclei Alexander Volya Florida State University DOE support: DE-SC9883 Trento September 216 Questions Description of clustering, from
More informationSpectroscopic overlaps between states in 16 C and 15 C IV (with WBT and NuShell)
Spectroscopic overlaps between states in 16 C and 15 C IV (with WBT and NuShell) Y. Satou January 26, 2014 Abstract Shell-model calculations were performed to extract spectroscopic overlaps between states
More informationAngular-Momentum Projected Potential Energy Surfaces Based on a Combined Method. Jianzhong Gu. (China Institute of Atomic Energy, Beijing, China)
Angular-Momentum Projected Potential Energy Surfaces Based on a Combined Method Jianzhong Gu (China Institute of Atomic Energy, Beijing, China) 2011 KLFTP-BLTP Joint Workshop on Nuclear Physics (Sep. 6-8,
More information