1 / 39

IS THE NUCLEAR LARGE AMPLITUDE COLLECTIVE DYNAMICS ADIABATIC OR NON ADIABATIC ?

IS THE NUCLEAR LARGE AMPLITUDE COLLECTIVE DYNAMICS ADIABATIC OR NON ADIABATIC ?. W. Brodziński, M . Kowal, J. Skalski National Centre for Nuclear Research (Warsaw) P. Jachimowicz University of Zielona Gora. Motivation = an inherent limitations of both: hot & cold fusion reactions:.

tyler-mejia
Download Presentation

IS THE NUCLEAR LARGE AMPLITUDE COLLECTIVE DYNAMICS ADIABATIC OR NON ADIABATIC ?

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. IS THE NUCLEAR LARGE AMPLITUDE COLLECTIVE DYNAMICS ADIABATIC OR NON ADIABATIC ? W. Brodziński, M. Kowal, J. Skalski National Centre for Nuclear Research(Warsaw) P. Jachimowicz University of Zielona Gora

  2. Motivation = an inherent limitations of both: hot & cold fusion reactions: Hot (well- deformed radioactive actinides (Act.) targets are used and compound nucleus is quite excited ) Cold (magic nuclei as targets are used with projectiles heavier than 40Ar and Compound system is in this case only weakly heated and is cooled down via emission of just one or two neutrons ) produced nuclei lies belong to the far “island of stability” of superheavy elements. to produce more & more heavier nuclei the mass and charge of projectile should be increased but it pulls an increase of the Coulomb repulsion what drastically reduces the cross sections. • attempts of going beyond the reactions Act. + 48Ca by using heavier projectiles like 50Ti, 54Cr, 58Fe, and 64Ni gave no results so far. • all heavier actinides with Z>98 live to short that one could perform target with them. Cross sections ~ FEMTOBARNS

  3. Introduction • Done: calculations for masses, shapes, fission barriers, Q-alpha etc… for even – even actinides • Conclusions: quite good agreement with exp (masses & Qalpha: rms = 0.3 MeV, BfA rms=0.5 MeV, BfB=0.7MeV • Hope 1 : with the same set of the parameters one can predict properties of SHE + • Hope 2: one can extend calculations on odd systems • General Hope: K-isomers or high–K ground states of odd & odd-odd nuclei - a chance for longer half-lives of SHE

  4. Microscopic-macroscopic method with a possibility of many various deformations • Calculated energy: => ~L => ~R => ~A | - spliting energy The effect of intruder states lying sclose to the Fermi level is most apperent in the heavier nuclei

  5. SPHERICAL HARMONICS PARAMETRIZATION

  6. Ground state shapes, even-even Micro-macro results In contrast to many Skyrme forces, Woods-Saxon micro- macro model gives lower barriers and mostly oblate ground states for Z>=124,126 (no magic gap for 126 protons). P. Jachimowicz, M. Kowal, and J. Skalski, PRC83, 054302 (2011).

  7. Fission barriers calculated using micro-macro model (e-e nuclei) Even-even SH nuclei: barries decrease for Z>114 The highest barrier for Z=114, N=178 Performance for even-even actinides: 1-st barriers, 18 nuclei rms : 0.5 MeV 2-nd barriers, 22 nuclei rms : 0.69 MeV P. Jachimowicz, M. Kowal, and J. Skalski, PRC85, 084305 (2012). M. Kowal, P. Jachimowicz and A. Sobiczewski, PRC82, 014303(2010) .

  8. Statistical parameters for different macro – micro calculations of first (in parentheses) and second barriers.

  9. Comparison of various models: some must be wrong. HN – Woods-Saxon FRLDM – P. Moller et al. SkM* - A.Staszczak et al. RMF – H.Abusara et al. FRDLM & RMF also perform well in actinides!

  10. Heaviest even-even fissioning nuclei: 112, 170 0.8 ms (old calc. 71 ms) 112, 172 97 ms (old calc. 4 s) 114, 172 130 ms (old calc. 1.5 s) (for Z=114, the local minimum in barrier at N=168) Old calculation: Smolańczuk, Skalski, Sobiczewski (1995)

  11. K. Siwek-Wilczyńska, T. Cap, M. Kowal, A. Sobiczewski, and J. Wilczyński, Phys. Rev. C86, 014611 (2012). • T. Cap, K. Siwek-Wilczyńska, M. Kowal, and J. Wilczyński,Phys. Rev. C 88, 037603 (2013).

  12. Second minima in actinides, Max diff = ~4 MeV! M. Kowal and J. Skalski,PRC82, 054303 (2010). P. Jachimowicz, M. Kowal, and J. Skalski, PRC85, 034305 (2012). N. Nikolov, N. Schunck, W. Nazarewicz, M. Bender, and J. Pei, PRC 83, 034305 (2011). Max diff = ~800 KeV!

  13. SHE masses (including odd & odd-odd) P. Jachimowicz, M. Kowal, and J. Skalski, PRC 89, 024304 (2014) • A fit to exp. masses Z>82, N>126, • number of nuclei: 252 • For odd and odd-odd systems there are 3 additional parameters – macroscopic energy shifts (they have no effect on Q alpha). >>Predictions for SHE: 88 Qalpha values, Z=101-118, 7 differ from exp. by more than 0.5 MeV; the largest deviation: 730 keV (blocking). Slight underestimate for Z=108; Overestimate: Z=109-113

  14. Statistical parameters of the fit to masses in themodel with blocking in separate groups of even-even, odd-even, even-odd and odd-odd heavy nuclei: Q alpha 204 nuclei in the fit region blocking q.p.method mean 326 keV 225 keV error rms 426 keV 305 keV 88 nuclei Z=101-118 mean 217 keV 196 keV error rms 274 keV 260 keV The same but for the method withoutblocking.

  15. Z N Omega(n) Omega(p) K • 173 5/2+ 7/2- 6- • 112 173 15/2- 15/2- • 170 11/2+ 11/2+ • 169 5/2+ 9/2- 7- • 163 13/2- 3/2- 8+ • 110 163 13/2- 13/2- • 109 All 11/2+ > 11/2 • 169 9/2+ „ 10+ • 161 „ „ „ • 159 „ „ „ • 163 13/2- „ 12- • 163 „ 13/2- • 157 11/2- 11/2- • 107 163 13/2- 5/2- 9+ • 157 11/2- „ 8+ • 163 13/2- 13/2- • 157 11/2- 11/2- • 157 11/2- 9/2+ 10- • 151 9/2- 9/2+ 9- • 157 11/2- 11/2- • 157 11/2- 7/2- 9+ • 151 9/2- 7/2- 8+ • 149 7/2+ 7/2- 7- • 101 157 11/2- 1/2- 6+ High-K states: a chance for longer half-lives. < Candidates for high-K g.s. in odd or odd-odd SHN in the W-S model In even-even systems one should block high-K close-lying orbitals, like: 9/2+ and 5/2- protons below Z=108 or 11/2- and 9/2+ neutrons below N=162

  16. Possible Q-alpha hindrance: the 14- SD oblate ground state in parent. The G.S. to G.S. transition inhibited; SDO to SDO has smaller Q.

  17. protons

  18. neutrons

  19. Unique blocked orbitals may hinder alpha transitions. The effect of a reduced Q alpha for g.s. -> excited state (left panel) on the life-times (below) according to the formula by Royer.

  20. G.S. configuration: P:11/2+ [6 1 5] N:13/2- [7 1 6] Fixing the g.s. configuration rises the barrier by 6 MeV. Even if configuration is not completely conserved, a substantial increase in fission half-life is expected.

  21. Mass parameter for odd system even In the diabatic scienario one can imagine that blocked state lies higher in energy than the g.s. => Negative values of mass parameter! Around the crosing region two states are close together => Mass parameter explode! Due to pairing even far awy from crossing one can imagine that on both side of fermi level quasiparticles have practicaly the same energies (if slopes of the levels are similar) => Mass parameter explode! odd

  22. IS THE LASD ADIABATIC OR NON ADIABATIC ? To CROSS or NOT to CROSS ? W. Nazarewicz, Nucl. Phys A 557 (1993) Q Landau – Zenereffect 2Δ ADiabatic Diabatic

  23. Central Open Questions/Problems: • What are the conditions for the many – body system to give up its quantum characteristic? • How to calculate the stability of odd nuclei (fission & alpha half – lives) ? • Problem of mass parameters for odd systems! • How many colective variables is enough ?

  24. Shallow minima (0.5 MeV or less ) Deep minima (3 - 4 MeV) mac-mic model S. Ćwiok et, al. self-consistent models mac-mic model P. Moller et, al. Theory: Blons et, al. (231,232,233Th) Debrecen-Munich (232,234,236U) Experiment: Status of third minimum in actinides: ? ? ?

  25. A B

  26. Thedipole deformation b1 is omittedthere, ascorrespondingto a shift of the origin of coordinates which leaves energy(always calculated in the center of mass frame) invariant.However, this is true only for weakly deformed shapes.For large elongations, b1 acquires a meaning of a realshape variable.

  27. IIIrd minima – type: A • minima withlarger octupole deformations (A) have quadrupolemomentsQ=170 b, disturbinglyclose to the scission region. • minima (A) are just intermediate congurations on the scission path, whose energywas calculated erroneously because of limitations of theadmitted class of shapes. One can nd continuous 8D paths start ing at the supposed IIIrd minimum and leading to scission, along which energy decreases gradually. M. Kowal, J. Skalski, PRC 85, 061302(R) (2012)

  28. IIIrd minima – type: B

  29. IIIrd minima – type: B P. Jachimowicz, M. Kowal, J. Skalski, PRC 87, 044308 (2013)

  30. MODIFY FUNNY-HILLS PARAMETRIZATION eg. : Krzysztof Pomorski, Johann Bartel, Int. J. Mod. Phys. E, Vol. 15, No. 2 (2006) 417.

  31. MODIFY FUNNY-HILLS PARAMETRIZATION c × h ×α×η = 251 904 gird points 232Th 0.5 MeV

  32. MODIFY FUNNY-HILLS PARAMETRIZATION c × h ×α×η = 251 904 gird points 236U no third minimum

  33. THREE QUADRATIC SURFACE PARAMETERIZATION

  34. THREE QUADRATIC SURFACE PARAMETERIZATION eg. : Peter M̈oller et al., Phys. Rev. C,79 (2009) 064304.

  35. 236U 286Fl

  36. ●Heights of the first and second fission barriers as well as the excitation of the second minimum are convergent with those three classes of nuclear shape parameterizations. ●We found the similar depth of the third minimum of the order of several hundred of keV for all tested parameterizations. This is still in a sharp contrast with the experimental status of the III-rd minima in those nuclei. Their experimental depth of 3–4 MeV contradicts all realistic theoretical predictions. ● Among all investigated parameterizations the most effective and efficient (the smallest amount of required dimension without apparent loss of the described shapes) is the modify Funny –Hills prescription.

More Related