1 / 40

Unexpected nonquenching of the isoscalar spin-M1 transitions

Unexpected nonquenching of the isoscalar spin-M1 transitions. Hiroaki MATSUBARA. Tokyo Women’s Medical University. matubara@twmu.ac.jp. 2015 Nov-16-19 HST15@Osaka. Collaborators. Quenching problem of GT strength. (p,n) reaction. GT sum rule (model independent).

brittanyb
Download Presentation

Unexpected nonquenching of the isoscalar spin-M1 transitions

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Unexpected nonquenching of the isoscalar spin-M1 transitions Hiroaki MATSUBARA Tokyo Women’s Medical University matubara@twmu.ac.jp 2015 Nov-16-19 HST15@Osaka

  2. Collaborators

  3. Quenching problem of GT strength (p,n) reaction GT sum rule (model independent) K. Ikeda PL 3, 271 (1963) Only 50%strength has been observed in experiment. Where is missing strength? Measured area Δ-h? ~50% B(GT) 2p2h? 50 300 Ex. (MeV) 0 25 ・Δ-h excitation （excitation of quark）　~300 MeV IV only M. Ichimura, H. Sakai and T. Wakasa; PPNP. 56, 446 (2006). ・2p2h excitation （tensor force effect） ~50MeV IS / IV

  4. Quenching of spin strength 1+ 1+ T=1 1+ T=0 0+ T=0 12C 12B (12N) Quenching factor (sd-shell): Experiment / Theory of transition Uncertain results ・Quench is dominant ・Consistent with 2p2h theories However, ・ Large error bar ・ Nuclear dependence (*) Taken from G.M. Crawley PRC(1989): (p,p’) on sd-shell nuclei

  5. Quenching of spin strength 1+ 1+ T=1 1+ T=0 0+ T=0 12C 12B (12N) Quenching factor (sd-shell): Experiment / Theory of transition Nonquench! (*) Taken from G.M. Crawley PRC(1989): (p,p’) on sd-shell nuclei

  6. Nonquenched IS spin-M1 strength was found by the present work. - Is it consistent with Δ-h excitation? - Is it consistent with 2p2h excitation? No Yes Quenching factor (sd-shell): Experiment / Theory of transition Nonquench! (*) Taken from G.M. Crawley PRC(1989): (p,p’) on sd-shell nuclei

  7. Experiment and analysis

  8. (p,p’) experiment at the RCNP A. Tamii, NIMA605, 326 (2009) Meas. Angle =0—14 deg Proton beam : 295 MeV ΔE (FWHM)：　40 keV →20keV MWDCs Plastic Scinti. Dispersion matching

  9. Targets Systematic study of all the T=0 (stable, N=Z even-even) nuclei 12C, 16O, 20Ne, 24Mg, 28Si, 32S, 36Ar, 40Ca Five targets will be reported in this talk. 12C, 24Mg, 28Si : Self-supporting metal foil 36Ar : Gas cell target 32S : Cooled self-supporting elemental foil H. Matsubara, NIMA 267 (2009). H. Matsubara, NIMA 678 (2012). Liquid nitrogen temperature Aramid window (6um-thickness)

  10. High energy-resolution spectrum Sn Sp

  11. Energy spectra at 0-degrees 32S 12C 24Mg 36Ar 28Si

  12. Trans. density : USD, USDA, USDB(from shell model calculation) NN interaction. : Franey and Love, PRC31(1985)488. (325 MeV data) Jπ assignment from shape of ang. dist. ・Distorted wave Born approximation by DWBA07 1+ 1+ 1+ 1+ • Forward peaking for L=0 transition. • M1 has the maximum at 0 degree. • 0+, IS-1+, IV-1+ and others • Distributions at 0-5 degree are similar. • Difference between IS and IV is due to exchange tensor term.

  13. IS IV 0+ 1- 2+ IS, IV spin-M1 angular dist. (28Si)

  14. Unit cross section (UCS) ・ Conversion factor from cross-section to squared nuclear matrix element (SNME) ・ Calibration from β andγ-decay measurements (assuming the isospin symmetry) (T= IS or IV) UCS Kinematical factor SNME (To be obtained) ・ Mass dependence established in GT study T.N. Taddeucci, NPA469 (1987).

  15. IS/IV spin-M1 strength dist. Squared Nuclear Matrix Element

  16. Summation of spin-M1 SNME ・ Summation up to 16 MeV (up to 0-hw). ・ Compared with shell-model calculations using USD-int. Squared Nuclear Matrix Elem. (Bareg) (Eff. g) Averaged quenching factors: IS spin-M1 trans. is not quenched.

  17. Consistency with the IS Magnetic Moment and the effective g-factor Effective g-factors were determined to reproduce <S>. The factors come from the g-factors in free space. Spin-matrix Data taken from B.A. Brown, NPA (1987). Magnetic moment Spin-matrix <S> Quenching is dominant at the shell-edge.

  18. Consistency with the IS Magnetic Moment and the effective g-factor Effective g-factors were determined to reproduce <S>. The factors come from the g-factors in free space. Spin-matrix Data taken from B.A. Brown, NPA (1987). Magnetic moment Spin-matrix <S> Quenching is dominant at the shell-edge. Quenching is suppressed at the mid-shell.

  19. What does the nonquench suggest? Spin alignment in the ground state Suggesting 2p2h excitation due to tensor force

  20. Spin alignment in the ground state : total spin operator in a nucleus : spin alighment in the g.s. Nonquench suggests

  21. How to deduce <Sp・Sn>? IS : in-phase transition for p and n IV : out-phase transition for p and n Sum of IS : (Closure approx.) Sum of IV : Subtraction of IS-sum minus IV-sum

  22. <Sp・Sn>values USD with eff. g-factors by Arima, Towner, Brown

  23. <Sp・Sn>values Experimental results suggest spin alignment.

  24. <Sp・Sn>values Shell-model : USD interaction Correlated Gaussian Meth.: W. Horiuchi AV8’: 0.135 (stronger tensor) G3RS: 0.109 (weaker tensor) Minnesota: -0.020 (no tensor)

  25. <Sp・Sn>values Shell-model : USD interaction Correlated Gaussian Meth.: W. Horiuchi No-Core Shell-model: P. Navratil

  26. Spin alignment is supported by state-of-the-art calc. with tensor force.

  27. Open questions • Experimental results are up to 16 MeV. • No experimental data at high Ex. • What makes dependence of quench/nonquench at sd-shell ? • Large quench for shell-edge nuclei • Nonquench for mid-shell nuclei

  28. Summary • Non-quenching was observed in the IS spin-M1 transitions. • Introducing <Sp・Sn>, the present result suggests that the quenching in spin transitions are due to 2p2h excitations preliminary resulting from tensor interaction. • State-of-the-art calculations support the new interpretation of the spin alignment in the g.s. Thanks for the attention.

  29. <Sp・Sn>

  30. Proportionality of UCS (28Si) Detection limit Detection limit Theoretical study (DWBA calc.) suggests 10% uncertainty for IS.

  31. Isospin breaking in 24Mg

  32. Model space dependence USD = sd-shell SDPFM = sdpf-shell 唯一計算できた20Neの例 Free gs-factor モデル空間の拡張でも RIS/IVの絶対値は改善しない

  33. Unit cross section (UCS) For isoscalar part … Mirror states of γ-decay widths of 11B/11C were employed to deduce B(M1)IS. Y.Fujita, PRC 62 (2000) 044314 Decomposition of IS spin and orbital pats T.Kawabata, PRC 70, (2004)

  34. Total-spin-product in g.s. SM calc. Realistic-int. calc. 12C(e,e’): P.von Neumann-C., NPA(2000)

  35. (p,p’) → spin-M1 (p,n) or (n,p) → GT M1-IS (στ) M1-IV(στz) GT (στ±) Δ-h impossible possible possible possible possible 2p-2h possible Another approach to GT quenching M1 transition is analogous to GT transition. analogous 1) Δ-N-1 configuration ------ only IV 2) 2p-2h configuration ------ both IS and IV SM QIS> QIV= QGT QIS= QIV= QGT Difference of quenching degree between M1-IS and IV provides us essential information of GT quenching.

  36. What is spin-quenching? Exp. Calc. Origin GT-quenching GT Sum-rule 2p-2h >> Δ-h Truncation of high-order config. mix. ( e.g. 2p-2h, core-pol.) SM-quenching GT, IS/IV-M1 S.M. BW: B.A. Brown, NPA (1987). TK: I.S. Towner, NPA (1983). Ar: A. Arima, ANP (1987). Spin-quenching at A=17 and 39 Well studied M. Ichimura, PPNP (2006). Understood ?

  37. Spin-quenching at A=28 (28Si) 2p-2h How are the exp. data of spin-M1? (p,p’) experiment on 28Si 1, Sensitive to spin excitation 2, T=0 target → Separable IS from IV ・Large uncertainty ・No systematic study -Only 28Si and 32S ・Incomprehensive trend Why is IS-M1 so quenched? Δ-h : Typical naive example TK, Ar : Assumed mass-dependence Exp. : G.M. Crawley et at. PRC (1989)

More Related