1: %
2: % REF: B/
3: % Title: Electron impact excitation of helium-like ions up to
4: % n = 4 levels including radiation damping
5: % Authors: Franck Delahaye, Anil K. Pradhan, Claude J. Zeippen
6: %
7: %
8: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
9: %%% %%%
10: %%% INSTITUTE OF PHYSICS PUBLISHING %%%
11: %%% %%%
12: %%% IOPLPPT.STY LaTeX preprint style file for IOP Journals %%%
13: %%% %%%
14: %%% Copyright 1993 IOP Publishing Ltd %%%
15: %%% %%%
16: %%% Permission is hereby given to use this file for %%%
17: %%% material to be submitted to or published by %%%
18: %%% Institute of Physics Publishing %%%
19: %%% %%%
20: %%% Version 1.1 20 September 1993 %%%
21: %%% %%%
22: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
23: %
24: % First we have a character check
25: %
26: % ! exclamation mark " double quote
27: % # hash ` opening quote (grave)
28: % & ampersand ' closing quote (acute)
29: % $ dollar % percent
30: % ( open parenthesis ) close paren.
31: % - hyphen = equals sign
32: % | vertical bar ~ tilde
33: % @ at sign _ underscore
34: % { open curly brace } close curly
35: % [ open square ] close square bracket
36: % + plus sign ; semi-colon
37: % * asterisk : colon
38: % < open angle bracket > close angle
39: % , comma . full stop
40: % ? question mark / forward slash
41: % \ backslash ^ circumflex
42: %
43: % ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ
44: % abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz
45: % 1234567890
46: %
47: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
48: %
49: \documentstyle[12pt,epsfig]{iopart}
50: %
51: % submitted to Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics
52: %
53: % Ref: B/
54: %
55: \def\las{\mathrel{\hbox{\rlap{\hbox{\lower4pt\hbox{$\sim$}}}\hbox{$<$}}}}
56: \def\gas{\mathrel{\hbox{\rlap{\hbox{\lower4pt\hbox{$\sim$}}}\hbox{$>$}}}}
57: \def\Gamr{\mit\Gamma\sp{\rm r}}
58: \def\Gama{\mit\Gamma\sp{\rm a}}
59: \def\o{\sp{\rm o}}
60: \def\ca19{Ca{\sc\,xix}}
61: \def\etal{{\it et \thinspace al.}\ }
62: %
63: \begin{document}
64: \jl{2}
65: %
66: \title[EIE He-like ions]{Electron Impact Excitation of Helium-like
67: ions up to n=4 levels including radiation damping}
68:
69: \author{Franck Delahaye$^{\dag,\ddag}$, Anil K. Pradhan$^{\dag}$ and Claude J.
70: Zeippen$^{\ddag}$}
71:
72: \address{\dag Department of Astronomy,
73: Ohio State University \\ Columbus, Ohio,
74: USA, 43210}
75: \address{\ddag LUTH (UMR 8102 associ\'ee au CNRS et \`a l'Universit\'e Paris
76: 7),\\ Observatoire de Paris, F-92195 Meudon, France }
77:
78: \begin{abstract}
79:
80: Helium-like ions provide the most important X-ray spectral diagnostics
81: in high temperature fusion and astrophysical plasmas.
82: We previously presented computed collision strengths
83: for O~VII including relativistic fine structure, levels up to the $n=4$
84: complex and radiation damping of autoionizing resonances. We have extended
85: this work to other He-like ions (N, Ne, Mg, Al, Si, S, Ca).
86: The calculations are carried out using the Breit-Pauli R-matrix (BPRM) method
87: with a 31-level eigenfunction expansion.
88: Collision strengths for the principal lines important in X-ray plasma
89: diagnostics, w, x, y and z, corresponding to the 4 transitions to
90: the ground level $1s^2 \ (^1S_0)
91: \longleftarrow 1s2p (^1P^o_1), 1s2p (^3P^o_2), 1s2p (^3P^o_1), 1s2s
92: (^3S_1)$, are explicitly shown. We find the effect of radiation damping
93: to be significant for the forbidden transitions in heavier He-like ions,
94: which should affect the diagnostic line ratios.
95: We extrapolated the collision strengths to their values at infinite energy
96: using
97: the Burgess-Tully extrapolation technique. This is required to calculate
98: the Maxwellian average collision strengths at high temperature.
99: We show that the coupling between dipole allowed and inter-combination
100: transitions affects increasingly the effective collision strengths for the
101: $n ^1S_0 - n\prime ^3P_1$ transition as the charge of the ion increases. This
102: clearly affects the treatment of the extrapolation toward the infinite energy
103: point of the collision strength.
104: This work is carried out as part of the Iron Project-RmaX Network.
105:
106: \end{abstract}
107:
108:
109:
110: \pacno{34.80.Kw}
111: \maketitle
112:
113: \submitted
114:
115: \section{Introduction}
116:
117: Helium-like ions provide the most important X-ray spectral diagnostics
118: in high temperature fusion and astrophysical plasmas.
119: The new generation of X-Ray satellites such as the Chandra X-Ray
120: Observatory and the X-Ray Multi-Mirror Mission-Newton provide
121: high resolution spectra of
122: different types of astronomical objects (e.g. Kaastra \etal 2000,
123: Porquet and Dubau 2000, Porquet \etal 2001). The high sensitivity of these
124: observatories and the high quality of the spectra they produce requires
125: highly accurate atomic data for a precise interpretation.
126: The aim of the Iron Project-R-matrix calculations for X-ray
127: spectroscopy (IP-RmaX) is to calculate extended sets of accurate collision
128: strengths and rate coefficients for all ions of importance in X-Ray
129: diagnostics.
130: Among previous works, the electron impact excitation of
131: Helium-like ions was considered by Sampson \etal (1983)
132: and Zhang \& Sampson (1987). They used the Coulomb-Born approximation with
133: exchange, intermediate coupling, and some resonance effects to
134: obtain collision strengths for Helium-like ions, with atomic number
135: Z spanning a large
136: range of values ($4<Z<74$). The present work aims at generating a more complete
137: dataset of
138: high reliability for He-like ions, including all important effects for
139: highly-charged ions such as relativistic effects, radiation damping, and
140: resonances in higher complexes up to $n=4$.
141:
142: The method and computations are summarized in section 2.
143: Results for the collision strengths and important issues
144: are discussed in section 3, and the present results for the effective
145: (Maxwellian averaged) collision strengths are
146: compared with previous calculations. The main conclusions are given in
147: section 4.
148:
149: \section{Method and Computations}
150:
151: The collisional calculation in the present work has been carried out using
152: the Breit-Pauli R-matrix (BPRM) method as used in the Iron Project (IP) and
153: utilized in a number of previous publications.
154: The aims and methods of the IP are presented in Hummer \etal (1993).
155: We briefly summarize the main features of the method and present calculations.
156:
157: In the coupled channel or close coupling (CC) approximation
158: the wave function expansion,
159: $\Psi(E)$, for a total spin and angular symmetry $SL\pi$ or $J\pi$,
160: of the (N+1) electron system
161: is represented in terms of the target ion states as:
162:
163: \begin{equation}
164: \Psi(E) = A \sum_{i} \chi_{i}\theta_{i} + \sum_{j} c_{j} \Phi_{j},
165: \end{equation}
166:
167: \noindent
168: where $\chi_{i}$ is the target ion wave function in a specific state
169: $S_iL_i\pi_i$ or level $J_i\pi_i$, and $\theta_{i}$ is the wave function
170: for
171: the (N+1)$^{th}$ electron in a channel labeled
172: $S_iL_i(J_i)\pi_i \ k_{i}^{2}\ell_i(SL\pi) \ [J\pi]$; $k_{i}^{2}$ is the
173: incident kinetic energy. In the second sum the $\Phi_j$'s are
174: correlation
175: wave functions of the (N+1) electron-system that (a) compensate for the
176: orthogonality conditions between the continuum and the bound orbitals,
177: and (b) represent additional short-range correlations that are often of
178: crucial importance in scattering and radiative CC calculations for each
179: symmetry. The $\Phi_j$'s are also referred to as ``bound channels", as
180: opposed to the continuum or ``free" channels in the first sum over the
181: target states. In the relativistic BPRM calculations the set of
182: ${SL\pi}$
183: are recoupled in an intermediate (pair) coupling scheme
184: to obtain (e + ion) states with total $J\pi$, followed by
185: diagonalization of the (N+1)-electron Hamiltonian. Details of the
186: diagonalization and the R-matrix method are given in many previous works
187: (e.g. Berrington \etal 1995).
188:
189: The target expansion for the close coupling calculations consists of 31
190: fine-structure levels arising from the 19 LS terms with principal quantum
191: number $n\leq 4$. The target eigenfunctions were developed using the
192: SUPERSTRUCTURE program
193: (Eissner \etal 1974) in a version due to Nussbaumer and Storey (1978).
194: The full expansion consists in 10 configurations up to n=4:
195: $1s^2, 1s2s, 1s2p, 1s3s, 1s3p, 1s3d, 1s4s, 1s4p, 1s4d$ and $1s4f$
196: The scaling factors have been obtained by first optimizing the $\lambda_{1s}$
197: parameter through the minimization of the energy of the ground term. Then
198: all the other scaling parameters have been optimized on the 19 terms
199: considered here.
200: The scaling factors in the {\it Thomas-Fermi} potential employed in
201: SUPERSTRUCTURE can be obtained upon request from the first author.
202: The optimization of the orbitals has been performed as follow:
203:
204: In order to estimate the quality of the target wavefunction expansion,
205: we compare the energy levels with those from the {\it National Institute
206: for Standards and Technology} (NIST). The agreement with the NIST values is
207: found to be very good, within 0.05\% for all levels. A better
208: criterion for the accuracy of the wavefunctions is the accuracy
209: of the oscillator strengths for transitions in the target ion .
210: The oscillator strengths agree well within 10\% (however, some
211: of the values are given by NIST with an estimated accuracy
212: of 30\%). Another accuracy criterion is the level of agreement between the
213: oscillator strengths in the length and the velocity formulations,
214: which we also find to be a few percent for all transitions.
215:
216: The 19 LS terms are recoupled in the relativistic BPRM calculations
217: into the corresponding 31 fine-structure
218: levels up to the $n=4$ complex using the routine
219: RECUPD that performs intermediate coupling
220: operations including the one-body Breit-Pauli operators (Hummer et. al.
221: 1993). The reconstructed target eigenfunctions and the
222: resulting target energies reproduce to $10^{-4}$ Ryd the results from
223: SUPERSTRUCTURE, verifying that the algebraic operations have been
224: carried out self-consistently and without loss of accuracy.
225: The collision strengths have been calculated for electron
226: energies $0 \leq E \leq 4 \times E(4 ^1P_1)$ Ryd. This wide energy range
227: ensures a good coverage of the region where resonances up to the $n=4$ complex
228: are important, as well as the higher energy region where no resonance has
229: been included (all channels are open) but where the background collision
230: strengths still make a significant contribution to the Maxwellian averaged
231: rate coefficient for electron temperatures of interest. However, it might not
232: be sufficient for the calculation of collision rates at high temperature. Given
233: the slow convergence of some transitions and the need for high partial wave at
234: high temperature, it is unpractical to carry the calculations at higher
235: energy. However it is possible to extrapolate the collision strengths to the
236: value at infinite electron energy using the procedure from Burgess and Tully
237: (1993).
238:
239: The inner region R-matrix basis set included 40 orbitals per angular
240: momentum.
241: Because of the importance of the near threshold resonances in the Maxwellian
242: average rate coefficient, careful attention has been devoted to the
243: resolution and a precise mesh has been chosen. A mesh of $10^{-5}$ Ryd was
244: selected for the region where resonances are important, and a coarser mesh for
245: the region where all channels are open.
246: We included the contribution to the collision strengths from all symmetries
247: with total angular momentum J and both odd and even parities,
248: $J\pi \leq (\frac{35}{2})^{o,e}$. The contribution of higher partial waves
249: was included
250: using the Coulomb-Bethe approximation via the `top-up' facility
251: in the asymptotic region program STGF of the R-matrix package
252: (Burke and Seaton 1986; modified by W. Eissner and G.X. Chen).
253:
254: \section{Results and discussion\protect\\}
255:
256: In figures 1 and 2 we present the collision strengths for transitions from
257: $2 ^3S_0$ and $2 ^1P^o_1$ respectively to the ground state for all
258: ions included in the present calculation. The high resolution of the calculations with
259: a large number of points allows us to resolve clearly all the resonances up to
260: the last threshold in the $n=4$ complex. We delineate the Rydberg series
261: converging to the different series limits in all three complexes.
262: The doubly excited (e + He-like ion ) $\rightarrow$ Li-like ion resonance complexes,
263: KMM, KMN etc.. converging
264: towards the different $n=3$ and $n=4$ levels are clearly resolved.
265:
266: %----------------------------------------------------------------------------
267: \begin{figure}
268: %\vspace*{-2.0cm}
269: \centering
270: \psfig{figure=Fig1.eps,height=17.0cm,width=17.0cm}
271: \vspace*{-1cm}
272: \caption{Collision strengths for the principal X-Ray line transition z
273: (from ground state $1s^2$ $^1S_0$ to $2 ^3S_1$).}
274: \end{figure}
275:
276: \begin{figure}
277: %\vspace*{-2.0cm}
278: \centering
279: \psfig{figure=Fig2.eps,height=17.0cm,width=17.0cm}
280: \vspace*{-1cm}
281: \caption{ Collision strengths for transitions corresponding to the
282: w (or r) line ($1s^2\ ^1S_0 \rightarrow 2 ^1P^o_1$ )}
283: \end{figure}
284:
285:
286: %----------------------------------------------------------------------------
287: \subsection{Radiation Damping}
288:
289: It has been previously shown (Presnyakov and Urnov 1979, Pradhan 1981,
290: Pradhan and Seaton 1985), that radiation damping may have a significant
291: effect on the resonances in collision strengths for highly charged ions
292: since the radiative decay rates
293: are large and compete with autoionization rates, i.e. the effect
294: of dielectronic recombination on electron impact excitation.
295: We studied in detail the radiation damping effect of dielectronic
296: recombination, on resonance structures, collision strengths, and
297: rate coefficients.
298: We presented the detailed results for O{\sc\,vii} in Delahaye \& Pradhan (2002)
299: (figures 3 to 6). We found for this ion that the radiation damping affected
300: only a small region just below the threshold of convergence. As a consequence
301: the effective collision strengths $\Upsilon$ are not affected at all.
302: However, radiation damping is important for higher-Z elements
303: since the transition probabilities increase with Z. Pradhan (1983a,b) has
304: estimated the effect on the z-transition to be 9\% in $\Upsilon$ for Fe{\sc\,xxv}
305: at the temperature of maximum abundance of helium-like iron, as also confirmed
306: by the detailed calculation done by Whiteford et al. 2001.
307:
308: We calculated the effect of radiation damping and found it to be significant
309: to more than 10\% at low temperatures for several transitions between
310: levels of \ca19. As the temperature increases the
311: effect on the rates decreases since the
312: contribution of the resonances near threshold to the rate becomes less
313: important.
314:
315: In Figure 3 we present the details of the radiation damping effect on the
316: collision strengths for the transition $2 ^3S_1\ -\ 1 ^1S_0$ of \ca19.
317: We clearly
318: see that the effect is important in the resonances near threshold and that it
319: will affect the effective collision strengths at low temperature as we show in
320: Figure 4.
321:
322: %-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
323: \begin{figure}
324: %\centering
325: \psfig{figure=Fig3.eps,height=17.0cm,width=17.0cm}
326: \caption{Collision strengths for the z-line (transition $2 ^3S_1\ -\ 1
327: ^1S_0$) in Ca XIX.
328: The black line represents the present results when the radiation damping is
329: neglected and the red one includes the effect. A zoom has been made on the region
330: near threshold.}
331: \end{figure}
332: %----------------------------------------------------------------------------
333:
334: \subsection{Effective Collision Strengths}
335:
336: The Maxwellian averaged collision strengths
337:
338: \begin{equation}
339: \Upsilon (T) = \int ^{\infty}_{0}
340: \Omega_{ij}(\epsilon_{j}) e^{-\epsilon_{j}/kT} d(\epsilon_{j}/kT),
341: \end{equation}
342: have been computed for all transitions among levels up to the $n=4$.
343: The collisional rates deduced for levels among $n=4$ might not be as
344: accurate as for level of lower complexes. Indeed, as has been shown for
345: He-like Fe XXV (Kimura \etal 1999, 2000, and Machado-Pelaez et. al. 2001),
346: and for He-like O VII (Delahaye \& Pradhan, 2002)
347: the resonances arising from the complex $n=N+1$
348: have a strong effect on transitions to and within the complex $n=N$. The
349: extension to the $n=5$ complex has been discussed by Whiteford et al. (2001)
350: and will not be repeated.
351:
352: In Figure 4 we present the results of the damping effect on transitions
353: ($2 ^1P^o_1,~2 ^3S_1,~2 ^3P^o_1,~2^3P^o_2$, corresponding to
354: the 4 principal lines w, z, x and y, that are of primary
355: interest in X-ray spectral diagnostics (e.g. Gabriel and Jordan 1969,
356: Pradhan 1982, Porquet et. al. 2001) .
357: We can anticipate that the damping effect will not affect significantly
358: the density sensitive ratio R(N$_e$) = z/(x+y) because the 3 transitions
359: are affected
360: similarly. However the ratio G(T$_e$) = (x+y+z)/w, sensitive to both the
361: temperature and the ionization balance in the plasma, will be reduced
362: due to the unaffected w line compared to the 3 other affected lines.
363: Therefore this temperature and ionization diagnostics would be
364: significantly modified.
365:
366: We also compared the effective collision strengths with previous calculations
367: from Zhang \& Sampson (1987). The agreement is good with a tendency
368: towards lower
369: values in Zhang \& Sampson and more pronounced for the z line. Indeed, the
370: difference reaches a maximum of 17\% at low temperatures for the z line, and
371: 13\% for the w line at high temperature. For the x and y lines the differences
372: are below 10\% and most of the time within 5\%.
373:
374: %-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
375: \begin{figure}
376: %\centering
377: \psfig{figure=Fig4.eps,height=17.0cm,width=17.0cm}
378: \caption{Effective collision strengths for the principal lines (z, x, y,
379: w).
380: solid line: Present work with damping,
381: Dashes: Present work without damping,
382: dotted line: Zhang \& Sampson 1987.}
383: \end{figure}
384: %----------------------------------------------------------------------------
385:
386:
387: From Figure 1 and 2 we can see that the general behavior is as
388: expected. We can see $\Omega$ decreasing as $Z$ increases. It roughly
389: follows
390: \begin{equation}
391: \Omega \propto (Z+1)^{-2}.
392: \end{equation}
393: This comes from the fact that in an isoelectronic sequence the
394: target is getting more compact as Z increases, the attraction from the highly charged
395: nucleus being stronger for higher Z.
396: We also see how the complexes get farther apart as Z increases, decreasing the
397: interaction between levels of the same symmetry but from different shells.
398:
399: In order to observe the general behavior along the isoelectronic sequence we
400: use the reduced effective collision strengths as introduced by
401: Burgess \& Tully (1992). It allows us to represent on the same plot the effective
402: collision strengths for each transition for all ions considered in the
403: sequence in a reduced temperature $T_R$ = T/Z$^3$ domain.
404:
405: The behavior at high energy normally should follow the
406: behavior corresponding to the type of transition (Burgess \& Tully 1992).
407: However, as we increase the charge the spin-orbit coupling is increasing
408: and as previously shown (Pradhan 1983, also mentioned in Whiteford et al. 2001)
409: in this case the relativistic effects
410: are crucial in order to account for this coupling, which of course does not
411: appear in the LS calculation.
412: In the present case the coupling between the triplet $P^o$ and the
413: singlet $P^o$ for example is becoming more and more important as we go to
414: heavier elements.
415: In the complex $n=2$, the levels $^1P^o$ and $^3P^o$ are more mixed for heavier
416: He-like ions.
417: As a consequence the effective collision strengths for transitions between
418: the ground state and $2 ^3P^o$ which is an inter-combination transition should
419: behave at high energy like
420: \begin{equation}
421: \Omega \sim const./E^2
422: \end{equation}
423: and $\lim_{E\rightarrow \infty} \Omega=0$ but the mixing between the two
424: levels, singlet and triplet, changes the behavior of this inter-combination
425: transition by introducing a dipole-allowed component. The
426: coulomb limit then is not the same any more and does not tend to $0$ when
427: $E \rightarrow 0$. While Pradhan (1983) showed the trend for He-like Fe, Se
428: and Mo (Z=26,34 and 42 respectively) the present work demonstrates that the
429: relativistic effects are important already at lower Z and not only
430: for species with $Z \ge 20$ (Pradhan 1983).
431: In Figure 5 we can see the change
432: in the behavior of the collision strengths as $E$ increases for this
433: inter-combination transition between the singlet $S$ and triplet $P^o$.
434: While He-like N, O and Ne present a discernible trend corresponding to
435: inter-combination transitions, it is clearly obvious
436: in He-like Si, S and Ca.
437: This is of importance in the
438: procedure to treat the infinite limit of the collision strengths. Indeed, the
439: definition of the effective collision strengths (eq. 3.3) supposes an
440: integration up to infinite energy. But in practice we have to stop at a
441: certain point
442: and make an extrapolation to infinity. As presented
443: in Burgess and Tully (1992), this extrapolation depends on
444: the nature of the transition.
445:
446: %-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
447: \begin{figure}
448: %\centering
449: \psfig{figure=Fig5.eps,height=17.0cm,width=17.0cm}
450: \caption{Detailed of reduced collision strengths for the inter-combination
451: transition $1^1S_0-2^3P^o_1$. The triangles represent the Coulomb-Born
452: limits as $E\rightarrow \infty$.}
453: \end{figure}
454: %----------------------------------------------------------------------------
455:
456:
457: In Figure 6 we present a comparison of the effective collision strengths
458: for the present results with 2 different
459: treatments for the high energy limit for the transition $1~^1S_0 -
460: 2~^3P^0_1$,
461: as well as the results from Zhang \& Sampson (1987) (in red).
462: The solid lines assume a dipole behavior for the inter-comnination transition
463: while the dotted lines indicate an inter-combination behavior without
464: the relativistic mixing with the dipole allowed transtion
465: $1^1S_0-2^1P^o_1$. We can see that the
466: former treatment is not adapted for the lighter elements and gives an
467: overestimation of the effective collision strengths at high temperatures but
468: is necessary for the heavier ones to avoid any underestimation which would
469: then directly affect the collisional rates.
470:
471:
472:
473: %-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
474: \begin{figure}
475: %\centering
476: \psfig{figure=Fig6.eps,height=17.0cm,width=17.0cm}
477: \caption{Effective collision strengths for He-like ions for
478: transitions among the ground state and $ n=2$ complex.
479: The solid black line assumes a dipole behavior at high energies for
480: the inter-combination transition $1~^1S_0~-~2~^3P_1^o$ while the
481: green dotted line is without relativistic mixing. In red are
482: the results from Zhang \& Sampson (1987).}
483: \end{figure}
484:
485: %%-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
486:
487: \section{Conclusion\protect\\}
488:
489: Some of the general conclusions of the paper are as follows.
490:
491: 1. The most complete close-coupling calculation using the Breit-Pauli
492: R-Matrix method has been
493: carried out for helium-like ions, including resonances up to $n = 4$
494: levels.
495: Detailed studies of radiation damping indicate that it may have a
496: significant effect on the detailed collision strengths in a small energy
497: region below the threshold(s) of convergence, but not on the effective
498: collision strengths for the low Z ions of the sequence.
499: However, radiation damping is important for higher-Z elements
500: since the transition probabilities increase with Z and must be taken into
501: account, especially at low temperature.
502:
503: 2. The new results for the important X-Ray line transition may significantly
504: affect the analysis of X-ray spectra from photoionized sources (e.g. active galactic
505: nuclei), where ions may be abundant at relatively low temperatures.
506: In collisional ionized (coronal) sources the new
507: results may not affect the theoretically computed line intensities
508: significantly at temperatures close to maximum abundance, but should still
509: do so at lower temperatures.
510: It would be preferable to employ the present data in future
511: collisional-radiative and photoionization models.
512:
513: 3. As all relevant atomic effects in electron-ion collisions have been
514: considered, and resonances have been carefully delineated, we should
515: expect the present results to be of definitive accuracy. Nonetheless, we
516: conservatively estimate the precision to be about 10-15\%.
517:
518: 4. A study of the line ratios R and G in He-like ions is in progress
519: for diagnostics of astrophysical and laboratory sources.
520:
521: 5. All data will be electronically available from the first author from
522: franck.delahaye@obspm.fr.
523:
524: The authors would like to thank Dr. Werner Eissner and Dr. Peter Storey for
525: their help and fuitful discussions.
526: This work was supported partially by the NASA Astrophysical Theory Program.
527: The computational work was carried out at the Ohio Supercomputer Center
528: in Columbus, Ohio.
529:
530: %***
531: %*** E n d o f p a g e 1 o f g a l l e y - m o d e o u t p u t
532: %***
533:
534: %------------------------------------------------------------------------
535:
536: \section*{References}
537:
538: \def\amp{{\it Adv. At. Molec. Phys.}\ }
539: \def\apj{{\it Astrophys. J.}\ }
540: \def\apjs{{\it Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser.}\ }
541: \def\apjl{{\it Astrophys. J. (Letters)}\ }
542: \def\aj{{\it Astron. J.}\ }
543: \def\aa{{\it Astron. Astrophys.}\ }
544: \def\aas{{\it Astron. Astrophys. Suppl.}\ }
545: \def\aasup{{\it Astron. Astrophys. Suppl.}\ }
546: \def\adndt{{\it At. Data Nucl. Data Tables}\ }
547: \def\cpc{{\it Comput. Phys. Commun.}\ }
548: \def\jqsrt{{\it J. Quant. Spectrosc. Radiat. Transfer}\ }
549: \def\jpb{{\it Journal Of Physics B}\ }
550: \def\pasp{{\it Pub. Astron. Soc. Pacific}\ }
551: \def\mn{{\it Mon. Not. R. astr. Soc.}\ }
552: \def\pra{{\it Physical Review A}\ }
553: \def\prl{{\it Physical Review Letters}\ }
554: \def\zpds{{\it Z. Phys. D Suppl.}\ }
555:
556: \begin{harvard}
557: %\item{}Bell R.H., Seaton M.J., 1985, AdSpR 15, 37
558:
559: %\item{}Berrington K.A., Burke P.G., Chang J.J., \etal, 1974, Comput.
560: %Phys. Commun. 8, 149
561:
562: %\item{}Berrington K.A., Burke P.G., Le Dourneuf M., \etal, 1978, Comput.
563: %Phys. Commun. 14, 367
564:
565: \item{}Berrington K.A., Eissner, W. and Norrington, P.H. 1995 \cpc 92 290
566:
567: \item{}Burgess, A. \& Tully, J.~A. 1992, \aa, 254, 436
568:
569: %\item{}Burke P.G., Seaton M.J., 1971, Math. Comput. Phys. 10, 1
570:
571: %\item{}Burke P.G., Hibbert A., Robb W.D., 1971, \jpb 4, 153
572:
573: \item{}Burke, V. M. and Seaton, M. J. 1986, \jpb 19 L533
574:
575: \item{} Delahaye, F., \& Pradhan, A.~K.\ 2002, \jpb, 35, 3377
576:
577: \item{}Eissner W., Jones M., Nussbaumer H., 1974, Comput. Phys. Commun. 8,270
578:
579: \item{} Gabriel, A.~H.~\& Jordan, C.\ 1969, \mn, 145, 241
580:
581: \item{} Hummer, D.~G., Berrington, K.~A., Eissner, W., Pradhan, A.~K., Saraph, H.~E.,
582: and Tully, J.~A.\ 1993, \aa, 279
583:
584: \item{}Kaastra J.S., Mewe, R., Liedahl, D.A., Komosa, S., and Brinkman, A.C.
585: 2000 \aa 354 L83
586:
587: \item{}Kimura,E., Nakazaki, S., Berrington, K.A. and Norrington P.H., 2000, \jpb
588: 17 3449
589:
590: \item{}Kimura, E., Nakazaki, S., Eissner, W.~B., and Itikawa, Y., 1999,
591: \aasup, 139, 167
592:
593: %\item{}Kingston A.E., Tayal S.S., 1983, \jpb 16, 3465 (a)
594:
595: %\item{}Kingston A.E., Tayal S.S., 1983, \jpb 16, L53 (b)
596:
597: \item{}Machado-Pelaez, M., Mendoza, C. and Eissner, W. (private communication)
598:
599: \item{} Nussbaumer, H.~\& Storey, P.~J.\ 1978, \aa, 64, 139
600:
601: \item{}Porquet D, Mewe R, Dubau J, Raassen A J J, and Kaastra J S
602: 2001 \aa 376 1113
603: \item{}Porquet D and Dubau J 2000 \aas 143 495
604:
605: \item{}Pradhan A.K., 1981 \prl 47 79
606:
607: \item{}Pradhan A.K., 1982 \apj 263 477
608:
609: \item{}Pradhan A.K., 1983 \pra 28 2113 (a) 2128 (b)
610:
611: \item{}Pradhan A.K., Seaton M.J., 1985, \jpb 18, 1631
612:
613: %\item{}Pradhan A.K., Norcross D.W., Hummer D.G., 1981, Ap. J. 246, 1031
614:
615: %\item{}Pradhan A.K., Norcross D.W., Hummer D.G., 1981, Phys. Rev. A 23,619
616:
617: \item{}Presnyakov and Urnov A.M., 1979, J. Phys. B 8, 1280
618:
619: \item{}Sampson D.H., Goett S.J., Clark R.E.H., 1983, Atomic Data Nuclear
620: Data Tables 29,467
621:
622: %\item{}Steenman-Clark L. And Faucher P., 1984, \jpb 17, 73
623:
624: \item{} Whiteford, A.~D., Badnell, N.~R., Ballance, C.~P., O'Mullane,
625: M.~G., Summers, H.~P., \& Thomas, A.~L.\ 2001, \jpb, 34, 3179
626:
627: \item{}Zhang H.L., Sampson D.H., 1987, Ap. J. Supp. Ser. 63, 487
628: \end{harvard}
629: %------------------------------------------------------------------------
630:
631: \enddocument
632:
633: %\377\377\366\343~\364\353]\377\343]u\363^\272\333\375t\323\336}\347\3159
634:
635:
636:
637: