1 / 42

Evidences for clustering

Cluster Models P. Descouvemont Physique Nucléaire Théorique et Physique Mathématique, CP229, Université Libre de Bruxelles, B1050 Bruxelles - Belgium. Evidences for clustering Cluster models: non-microscopic (nucleus-nucleus interaction) microscopic (NN interaction) continuum states

forbes
Download Presentation

Evidences for clustering

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. Cluster ModelsP. DescouvemontPhysique Nucléaire Théorique et Physique Mathématique, CP229,Université Libre de Bruxelles, B1050 Bruxelles - Belgium Evidences for clustering Cluster models: non-microscopic (nucleus-nucleus interaction) microscopic (NN interaction) continuum states Application 1 : 5H and 5He (microscopic 3 body) Application 2 : triple a process (non-microscopic) Application 3: 18F(p,a)15O (reaction, microscopic 2 body) Conclusions

  2. Introduction • Clustering: well known effect in light nuclei • Nucleons are grouped in “clusters” • Best candidate: a particle (high binding energy, almost elementary particle) Ikeda diagram: cluster states near a threshold (8Be, 20Ne, etc • Halo nuclei: special case of cluster states • Beyond the nucleon level: hypernuclei quarks etc.

  3. 1. Evidence for clustering Large distance between the clusters wave function important at large distancesExample :a+16O 3- cluster 1- a+16O 4+ Non-cluster 2+ 0+ 20Ne Comparison of radii:a~1.4 fm, 16O~2.7 fm For 20Ne 0+: <r2>1/2=3.9 fm For 20Ne 1-: <r2>1/2=5.6 fm

  4. Evidence for clustering 8Be: a cluster states q2(a)= 0.40 q2(a)=0.28 Large reduced width Defines the reduced width g2 (Pl=penetration factor) gW2=Wigner limit=32/2ma2 7Li: a cluster states and neutron cluster states q2(a)=0.01q2(n)=0.26 q2(a)=0.52q2(n)=0

  5. Evidence for clustering Exotic cluster structure: 6He+6He in 12BeM. Freer et al, Phys. Rev. Lett. 82 (1999) 1383 Rotational band:E(J)=E0+2J(J+1)/2mR2 With R=distance  estimate Calculation:P.D., D. Baye, Phys. Lett. B505 (2001) 71Mixing of 6He+6He and a+8He Particular cluster structure: halo nuclei: 11Be=10Be+n6He=a+n+nneutron=simplest cluster

  6. Cluster models vs ab initio models • cluster models: assume a cluster structure  effective nucleon-nucleon interaction  direct access to continuum states • microscopic (full antisymmetrization, depend on all nucleons) • non microscopic (nucleus-nucleus interaction) • semi-microscopic (approximate treatment of antisymmetrization) • ab initio models: more general try to determine a cluster structure realistic nucleon-nucleon interaction • Antisymmetrized Molecular Dynamics (AMD) • Fermionic Molecular Dynamics (FMD) • No Core Shell Model (NCSM) • Green’s Function Monte Carlo • Etc…

  7. 2. Cluster Models x r y r • Several variants • Non microscopic  2 clusters nucleus-nucleus interaction  3 clusters • Microscopic:  2 clustersnucleon-nucleon interaction •  3 clusters y x

  8. Cluster Models • 2-cluster models • General description • Microscopic approach: The generator coordinate method (GCM) • Continuum states: the R-matrix method • 3-cluster models • Hyperspherical coordinates • General description

  9. 2-body models Microscopic (+cluster approx.)RGM, GCM Non-microscopic:2 particles without structure= potential model r r ex: a+a, p+16O, etc. F1 ,F2=internal wave functions Solved by the GCM ex: 12C+a, 18F+p, etc.

  10. The Generator Coordinate Method (GCM) for 2 clusters The wave functions are expanded on a gaussian basis 1. potential model (non microscopic) Schrödinger equation: Expansion:  r=quantal relative coordinate Rn=generator coordinate (variational calculation)

  11. The Generator Coordinate Method (GCM) for 2 clusters 2. Microscopic RGM notation GCM expansion Slater Determinants GCM notation  the basis functions are projected Slater determinants (b1=b2=b)  variational calculation needs matrix elements  matrix elements between Slater determinants (projection numerical) can be extended to 3-clusters

  12. Continuum states • Necessary for reactions • Exotic nuclei: low Q value  continuum important • Simple for 2 clusters, difficult for 3 clusters • Various methods: • Exact: calculation of the phase shift • Approximations: Complex scaling, Analytic continuation (ACCC), box, etc. (in general, only resonances) • Use of the R-matrix method: the space is divided into 2 regions (radius a) • Internal: r ≤ a : Nuclear + coulomb interactions : antisymetrization important • External: r > a : Coulomb only : antisymetrization negligible

  13. The R-matrix method: phase-shift calculation • 2 body calculations (spins zero) Internal wave function: combination of Slater determinants External wave function: Coulomb (Ul=collision matrix) Bloch-Schrödinger equation: • With L = Bloch operator • restore the hermiticity of H over the internal region) • ensures

  14. The R-matrix method: phase-shift calculation Solution of the Bloch-Schrödinger equation: R-matrix equations  N+1 unknown quatities (Ul, fl(Rn)), N+1 equations  <>I=matrix element over the internal region  stability with the channel radius a is a strong test

  15. 3-body models: Hyperspherical coordinates Jacobi coordinates x1, y1 3 sets (xi, yi), i=1,2,3 y1 x1 Hyperspherical coordinates: 6 coordinates Hamiltonian:

  16. ly lx Schrödinger equation YJMp is expanded over the hyperspherical harmonics To be determined Known functionshyperspherical harmonics • g=lx,ly,L,S • Set of equations for • Truncation at K = Kmax • Can be extended to 4-body, 5-body, etc…

  17. Three-body Models R r Non microscopic Microscopic y1 x1 Hamiltonian Hamiltonian: Vij=nucleus-nucleus interactionProblems with forbidden states Ex: 6He=a+n+n12C=a+a+a14Be=12Be+n+n Vij=nucleon-nucleon interaction Ex: 6He=a+n+n5H=t+n+n Projection: 7-dim integrals

  18. 3. Application to 5H and 5HeA. Adahchour and P.D., Nucl. Phys. A 813 (2008) 252 • 3.1Introduction • 5H unbound, with N/Z=4: very large value • Expected 3-body structure: 3H+n+n • Many works: experiment theory • Difficult for theory and experiment (unbound AND 3-body structure)  still large uncertainties on • ground state (Energy, width) • level scheme? • Isospin symmetry  expected 5He(T=3/2) analog states (suggested by Ter-Akopian et al., EPJ A25 (2005) 315)

  19. Application to 5H and 5He 3He+p 3H+n 3.2 Conditions of the calculation: microscopic3-cluster NN interaction: Minnesota H=H0+u*V (u=admixture parameter in the Minnesota interaction: u~1) From 3He+p: u=1.12

  20. Application to 5H and 5He n 3H n n  n 3He p 3H Cluster structure: n x 5H=3H+n+n Tz=3/2,T=3/2 y 5He=3He+n+n coupled with 3H+n+p Tz=1/2, T=1/2,3/2 Main difficulty: unbound states  need for specific methods: ACCC

  21. Application to 5H and 5He E(l) 1 l0 l • 3.3 Analytic Continuation in the Coupling Constant (ACCC)[V.I. Kukulin et al., J. Phys. A 10 (1977) 33] • Write H as H=H0+lV (l=1 is the physical value, E(l=1)>0 unbound state) • Determine l0 such as E(l0)=0 • For l > l0 : E(l)<0  bound-state calculation • l > l0 : x real, k imaginary, E real <0 • l < l0: x imaginary, k complex, E=k2=ER-iG/2  the width can be computed Padé approximant • Choose M+N+1 l values l > l0 determine ci,dj • Use l=1  k complex •  Main problem: stability!

  22. Application to 5H and 5He(T=3/2) 5H,5He T=3/2 state??3-body decay: a+n and t+d forb. 3He+n+n 3H+n+n 5H 3H+n+p 5He T=1/2 states: a+n structure 4He+n

  23. Application to 5H and 5He(T=3/2) Microscopic wave function: ci(r) expanded in gaussians centred at R = Generator Coordinate Method Energy curves E(R): eigenvalue for a fixed R value 5H Convergence with Kmax Different J values  fast convergence  1/2+ expected to be g.s.

  24. 3. Results for 5H and 5He(T=3/2) Application of the ACCC method  search for resonance energies and widths  test of the stability with N (Padé approximant) Er ~ 2 MeVG ~ 0.6 MeV  “theoretical” uncertainties

  25. 3. Results for 5H and 5He(T=3/2) 5He Energy curves Weak coulomb effects:essentially threshold

  26. 3. Results for 5H and 5He(T=3/2) Th.[1]: N.B. Shul’gina et al., Phys. Rev. C 62 (2000) 014312 Th.[2]: P.D. and A. Kharbach, Phys. Rev. C 63 (2001) 027001 Th.[3]: K. Arai, Phys. Rev. C 68 (2003) 03403 Th.[4]: J. Broeckhove et al., J. Phys. G. 34 (2007) 1955 Exp.[1]: A.A. Korsheninnikov et al., PRL 87 (2001) 092501 Exp.[2] M.S. Golovkov et al., PRL 93 (2004) 262501  broad state in 5He: Ex~21.3 MeVG~1 MeV

  27. 4. Application to 12C poorly known • Main issues: • Simultaneous description of a-a scattering and of 12C? • Bose-Einstein condensate? • Astrophysics (Triple-a process, Hoyle state + others?) a+a+a Well known • Two approaches • Microscopic theory • Non microscopic theory  3a continuum states?

  28. 4. Application to 12C • Microscopic models • RGM: M. Kamimura (Nucl. Phys.A 351 (1981) 456) : form factors of 12C • GCM: E. Uegaki et al., PTP62 (1979) 1621: triangle structure of 12C P.D., D.Baye, [Phys. Rev. C36 (1987) 54]: 8Be+a model 8Be(a,g)12C S factor 2+ resonance (with the 02 state as bandhead) • GCM + hyperspherical formalisma+a+aM. Theeten et al., Phys. Rev. C 76 (2007) 054003 Only 12C spectroscopy (energies, B(E2), densities)

  29. 4+ 6 4 1- 1- 3- 2 0+ 3- 0+ 0 -2 2+ 4+ -4 -6 0+ -8 2+ -10 0+ a-a phase shifts 12C microscopic 12C Energy spectrum 12C energy curves GCM exp

  30. Application to 12C B. Non-Microscopic model • a+a scattering well described by different potentials • deep potentials (Buck potential) • shallow potentials (Ali-Bodmer potentials) • we may expect a good description of the 3a system • Removal of a-a forbidden states: projection method (V. Kukulin) supersymmetric transformation (D. Baye) • Buck potential (Nucl. Phys. A275 (1977) 246) • V=-122.6 exp(-(r/2.13)2) • deep • l independent • Others: a-a phase shifts have a similar quality

  31. 12C spectrum, J=0+ 0 -2 -4 Ali-Bodmer potential(shallow) Buck potential (deep) -6 exp ABD0 AB Buck+sup Buck+sup x 1.088 Buck+ proj  no satisfactory potential!!

  32. Application to 12C Calculation of 3a phase shifts: • Need for appropriate a-a potentials (3a potentials?) • Derivation of a-a potentials • from RGM kernels (non local) • M. Theeten et al., PRC 76 (2007) 054003 • Y. Suzuki et al., Phys. Lett. B659 (2008) 160 • Fish-bone model: reproduces a+a and a+a+a • Z. Papp and S. Moszkowski, Mod. Phys. Lett. 22 (2008) 2201 Non local potentials  difficult for 3-body continuum states • Microscopic approach to 3-body continuum states?In progress for a+n+n

  33. 5. Application to 18F(p,a)15ORef.: M. Dufour and P.D., Nucl. Phys. A785 (2007) 381 18F+n 18F+p 19Ne 19F • Very important for novae • Many experimental works: • Direct (18F beam) • Indirect (spectroscopy of 19Ne) • 2 recent experiments • Microscopic cluster calculation (19-nucleon system) • High level density  limit of applicability • Questions to address: • Spectroscopy of 19F and 19Ne (essentially J=1/2+,3/2+: s waves) • 18F(p,a)15O S-factor • How to improve the current status on 18F(p,a)15O?

  34. Application to 18F(p,a)15O • NN interaction: modified Volkov (reproduces the Q value) + spin-orbit • Multichannel: p+18Fa+15O n+18Ne • Shell model space: sd shell for 18F, 18Ne, p shell for 15O 18F: J=1+ (x7), 0+ (x3), 2+ (x8), 3+ (x6), 4+ (x3), 5+ (x1)15O : J=1/2-, 3/2-18Ne: J=0+ (x3), 1+ (x2), 2+ (x5), 3+ (x2), 4+ (x2) •  many configurations • Spectroscopy of 19Ne and continuum states (R-matrix theory) • At low energies (below the Coulomb barrier), s waves are dominant  J=1/2+ and 3/2+

  35. J=3/2+ 19 E ( Ne) 19 E ( F) cm cm Experiment Theory 1 5 18 n+ F 18 n+ F 0 4 18 p+ O 3 -1 -2 2 18 Fitted (NN int) p+ O 7.24 7.26 -3 1 7.08 18 6.53 18 p+ F p+ F 0 6.44 -4 6.50 6.42 5.50 -5 -1 15 15 -6 -2 a + N a + N 4.03 15 a + O 3.91 -7 -3 15 a + O -4 -8 1.54 1.55 -9 -5 19 19 19 19 Ne Ne F F

  36. J=1/2+ (no parameter) Ecm (19Ne) 19 E ( F) cm Experiment Theory 1 5 18 18 n+ F n+ F 0 4 18 p+ O -1 3 8.65 Near threshold -2 2 8.14 ? 18 p+ O 7.36 1 -3 18 18 p+ F p+ F 6.26 -4 0 5.94 (5.34) 5.35 -5 -1 -6 -2 15 15 a + N a + N 15 15 a + O a + O -7 -3 -4 -8 -5 -9 -10 -6 0 0 -11 19 19 19 19 -7 F Ne Ne F

  37. Microscopic 18F(p,a)15O S factor 1/2+= s wave  important down to low energies (constructive) interference with the subthreshold state

  38. Drawbacks of the model: • Some 3/2+ resonances missing • 1/2+ properties not exact (in 19F, unknown in 19Ne) • R matrix: allows to add resonances (3/2+) or to modify their properties (1/2+) E (MeV) cm 2 2 7.90 known in 19Funknown in 19Ne 1 1 18 p+ F modified 19Ne spectrum 0 18 n+ F 6.00 0 -1 5.35 -1 -2 Theory exp. 15 a + O -3 + J=1/2 19F, J=1/2+ -4 -5 -6 0 19 -7 Ne  prediction of two 1/2+ states: E=-0.41 MeV, G=231 keV E= 1.49 MeV, G=296 keV, Gp/G=0.53

  39. 18F(p,a)15O S factor 3/2+ resonances:interferences? • Consistent with experiment • Uncertainties due to 3/2+ strongly reduced near 0.2 MeV (1/2+ dominant)

  40. J.-C. Dalouzy et al: Ganil + LLN, Ref: Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 162503 (2009) 19Ne+p 19Ne*+p  18F+p+p Two recent experiments 18F+p 19Ne  evidence for a broad 1/2+ peak (E) near Ecm=1.45 MeV, G=292107 keV Cluster calculation Ecm=1.49 MeV, G=296 keV

  41. 18F(p,p)18F 18F(p,a)15O ds/dW (mb/sr) Ecm (MeV) Ecm (MeV) • A.C. Murphy et al: • Edinburgh + TRIUMF (radioactive 18F beam): Phys. Rev. C79 (2009) 058801 • Simultaneous measurement of 18F(p,p)18F and 18F(p,a)15O cross sections • R-matrix analysis  many resonances  no evidence for a 1/2+ resonance (E too low?)

  42. 6. Conclusions • Cluster models • Different variants: microscopic semi-microscopic non microscopic • Continuum accessible (R-matrix) • 5H, 5He(T=3/2) • 5H: resaonable agreement with other works • 5He (T=3/2): analog state of 5H above 3H+n+p threshold Ex~21.3 MeV, G~1 MeV • 12C • Impossible to reproduce 2a and 3a simultaneously (all models) • 3a continuum: future microscopic studies possible (a+n+n in progress) • 18F(p,a)15O • The GCM predicts a 1/2+ resonance (s wave) near the 18F+p threshold • Observed in an indirect experiment • Not observed in a direct experiment

More Related