scholarly journals The search for the origin of the light nuclei Li, Be, B

2009 ◽  
Vol 5 (S268) ◽  
pp. 469-471
Author(s):  
Hubert Reeves

AbstractMy aim is to show how the abundance ratios of the light elements (6 to 11) are related to the properties of the strong nuclear interaction and, in particular, to the major influence of closed shells of neutrons and protons, (the magic numbers : 2, 8, etc) on the binding energies of the nuclei.

1997 ◽  
Vol 12 (23) ◽  
pp. 1727-1736 ◽  
Author(s):  
Raj K. Gupta ◽  
S. K. Patra ◽  
W. Greiner

We have studied the structure of superheavy nuclei 294,302120 in the framework of a relativistic mean-field formalism, using three different parameter sets (NL1, NL–SH and TM1) in an axially deformed harmonic oscillator basis. The calculated shapes are found to be parameter-dependent, e.g. NL1 parameter set predicts 302120 as a spherical and 294120 a very weakly oblate deformed nucleus whereas NL–SH and TM1 parameter sets predict both the nuclei with strongly prolate/oblate deformed configurations, in their respective ground states. This result, coupled with the calculated single-particle energy spectrum for NL1 parameter set, supports for Z=120 nuclei the spherical magic shell more at N=184 than at N=172. Even for the spherical 302120 nucleus, many new closed shells are predicted and some of the known magic numbers are found absent. Also, the binding energies of the various isotopes of Z=104–111 nuclei are calculated whose comparisons with experimental data favor the NL1 parameter set.


Ilford G 5 photographic emulsions have been exposed to 950 MeV protons from the Birmingham synchrotron, and 430 m of proton track searched for nuclear disintegrations. Disintegrations of carbon, nitrogen and oxygen were selected by the potential barrier criterion; the adequacy of this method, which depends on the presence of a short a-particle track indicating the low Coulomb barrier of a disintegrating light nucleus, is discussed. The characteristics of the disintegrations occurring in the light nuclei are described and compared with those for heavy nuclei; most of the observed differences can be explained as features of the complete break-up of a nucleus consisting of a small number of nucleons.


2018 ◽  
Vol 68 (1) ◽  
pp. 377-404 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vincent Tatischeff ◽  
Stefano Gabici

In this review, we first reassess the supernova remnant paradigm for the origin of Galactic cosmic rays in the light of recent cosmic-ray data acquired by the Voyager 1 spacecraft. We then describe the theory of light-element nucleosynthesis by nuclear interaction of cosmic rays with the interstellar medium and outline the problem of explaining the measured beryllium abundances in old halo stars of low metallicity with the standard model of the Galactic cosmic-ray origin. We then discuss the various cosmic-ray models proposed in the literature to account for the measured evolution of the light elements in the Milky Way, and point out the difficulties that they all encounter. It seems to us that, among all possibilities, the superbubble model provides the most satisfactory explanation for these observations.


2010 ◽  
Vol 41 (4) ◽  
pp. 531-542
Author(s):  
E. L. Kuplennikov ◽  
A. Yu. Korchin ◽  
S. S. Kandybei

1965 ◽  
Vol 43 (7) ◽  
pp. 1248-1258 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Gilbert ◽  
F. S. Chen ◽  
A. G. W. Cameron

There has been discussion in the literature as to whether the cumulative number of levels in light nuclei varies more nearly as exp(const. [Formula: see text]) or exp(const. E), where E is the excitation energy. The question is examined in this paper. It is found that if one constructs "step diagrams" by plotting the cumulative number versus the energy, both formulas represent the data almost equally well. However, additional consideration of levels counted above neutron and proton binding energies shows that exp(const. [Formula: see text]) fails badly to represent the data, whereas exp(const. E) continues to give good fits. In either case E may be measured above an arbitrary ground-state energy E0. If the satisfactory formula is written in the form exp(E–E0)/T, then it is found that the dependence of the slope on mass number may be expressed in approximately the form T−1 = 0.0165A MeV−1, but there are significant deviations from this relation apparently related to shell structure. The intercepts E0 are quite variable but are roughly clustered according to the oddness or evenness of the neutron and proton numbers of the nucleus.


1951 ◽  
Vol 83 (3) ◽  
pp. 663-663 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jyumpei Sanada ◽  
Yasukazu Yoshizawa

2000 ◽  
Vol 14 (10) ◽  
pp. 1075-1092
Author(s):  
J. HAUCK ◽  
K. MIKA

Ordered structures, which are characterized by the numbers T1 and T2 of nearest and next-nearest neighbors of the same kind in T1, T2 structure maps, can be classified in enthalpy and entropy stabilized structures. 111 three-dimensional structures MxNy with identical Ti values of all M and N particles were determined for the three-dimensional lattices. The numbers of shells were extended to i=11–18 to compare the values for closed shells with the magic numbers x and y of isotopes (M = proton , N = neutron ) or small clusters MxNy or Mx□y (□=vacancy). Electroneutral clusters were derived for 42 structures with x ≠ y. Colloidal DNA or proteins are clusters with different Ti values of each structural unit within long chains.


1955 ◽  
Vol 14 (5) ◽  
pp. 490-492
Author(s):  
Shôta Suekane ◽  
Wataro Watari

1978 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 49-52 ◽  
Author(s):  
P Bisgaard ◽  
R Bruch ◽  
P Dahl ◽  
B Fastrup ◽  
M Rødbro

The discovery of the light nuclei n 0 1 H 1 2 H 1 3 He 2 3 has provided additional and much-needed material on which to base and test any theory of the structure and interaction on nuclear particles. The properties of these nuclei which are best known are their masses, the latest values of which are the following: n 0 1 1·0083 H 1 2 2·0142 H 1 3 3·0161 He 2 3 3·0172, assuming the validity of the mass scheme proposed independently by Oliphant, Kempton, and Rutherford, and by Bethe (in which the results of the disintegration experiments are found to be consistent if the He 4 :O 16 ration is taken as 4·0034 :16). From these masses the binding energies of the nuclei, considered as combinations of neutrons and protons, may be obtained. We find, then, that H 1 2 = H 1 1 + n 0 1 - 2·1 x 10 6 e -volts, H 1 3 = H 1 1 + 2 n 0 1 - 8·1 x 10 6 e -volts, He 2 3 = 2H 1 1 + n 0 1 - 6·9 x 10 6 e -volts. The most conspicuous feature of these figures is that the binding energy of both H 1 3 and He 2 3 is considerably greater than twice of H 1 2 , and the question arises as to whether this cab be explained without introducing an attractive force between the neutrons in H 1 3 and between the protons in He 2 3 . In this paper we attempt to answer the question by applying the variation method to calculate the binding energies of H 1 3 and He 2 3 , use being made of all available information bearing on the form of the neutron-porton interaction. It is found that definite results cannot be obtained in this direction, but the calculations would seem to indicate that these additional attractive forces must be introduced, and, in any case, upper limits may be found for their magnitude. Before discussing these calculations it is important to examine the velocity of the variation method as applies to H 1 2 by comparing results obtained by its use with exact solutions.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document