1:
2: %%%%%%%%%% LaTeX twice %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
3:
4: \documentstyle[12pt]{article}
5: \oddsidemargin -0.25cm\evensidemargin -0.25cm
6: \topmargin -1.0cm
7: \textwidth 16.cm
8: \textheight 23.5cm
9: \begin{document}
10: \baselineskip=14pt plus 1pt minus 1pt
11:
12: \begin{center}
13: {\Large \bf Rotations of Nuclei with Reflection Asymmetry
14: Correlations}
15: \end{center}
16: \medskip
17:
18: \begin{center}
19: {\large Nikolay Minkov$^*$\footnote[1] {e-mail:
20: nminkov@inrne.bas.bg}, S. B. Drenska$^*$, P. P. Raychev$^{*}$, R.
21: P. Roussev$^*$, and Dennis Bonatsos$^\dagger$ \\
22: \medskip
23: $^*$ Institute for Nuclear Research and Nuclear Energy, \\
24: 72 Tzarigrad Road, 1784 Sofia, Bulgaria\\
25: \medskip
26: $^\dagger$ Institute of Nuclear Physics, N.C.S.R. ``Demokritos'',\\
27: GR-15310 Aghia Paraskevi, Attiki, Greece}
28: \end{center}
29: \bigskip
30:
31: \begin{abstract}
32: We propose a collective Hamiltonian which incorporates interactions
33: capable to generate rotations in nuclei with simultaneous presence
34: of octupole and quadrupole deformations. It is demonstrated that
35: the model formalism could be applied to reproduce the staggering
36: effects observed in nuclear octupole bands. On this basis we
37: propose that the interactions involved would provide a relevant
38: handle in the study of collective phenomena in nuclei and other
39: quantum mechanical systems with reflection asymmetry correlations.
40: \end{abstract}
41: \bigskip
42:
43: The properties of nuclear systems with octupole deformations
44: \cite{BM75} are of current interest due to the increasing number of
45: evidences for the presence of octupole instability in different
46: regions of nuclear table \cite{BN96}. Various parametrizations of the
47: octupole degrees of freedom have opened a useful tool for
48: understanding the role of the reflection asymmetry correlations and
49: for analysis of the collective properties of such kind of systems
50: \cite{Ro90,Ham91,WD99}. As an important step in this direction it is
51: necessary to elucidate the question: which are the collective nuclear
52: interactions that correspond to the different octupole shapes and how
53: do they determine the structure of the respective energy spectra?
54: The physically meaningful answer could be obtained by taking
55: into account the simultaneous presence of other collective degrees of
56: freedom, such as the quadrupole ones.
57:
58: In the present work we address the above problem by examining the
59: interactions that generate collective rotations in a system with
60: octupole deformations. Based on the octahedron point symmetry
61: parametrization of the octupole shape \cite{Ham91}, we propose a
62: general collective Hamiltonian which incorporates the interactions
63: responsible for the rotations associated with the different octupole
64: deformations. It will be shown that after taking into account the
65: quadrupole degrees of freedom and the appropriate higher order
66: quadrupole-octupole interaction the model formalism would be able to
67: reproduce schematically some interesting effects of the fine
68: rotational structure of nuclear octupole bands. The study is strongly
69: motivated by the need of theoretical explanation of the recently
70: observed staggering patterns in octupole bands of light actinides
71: \cite{DBoct00} as well as by the possibility to gain an insight into
72: the fine structure of negative parity rotational bands based on
73: octupole vibrations.
74:
75: Our model formalism is based on the understanding that the
76: collective properties of a physical system in which octupole
77: correlations take place should be influenced by the following
78: most general octupole field $V_{3}=\sum_{\mu =-3}^{3}
79: \alpha_{3\,\mu}^{fix}Y^{*}_{3\,\mu}$, (in the intrinsic,
80: body-fixed frame) which can be written in the form \cite{Ham91}:
81: \begin{equation}
82: V_{3}=\epsilon_{0}A_{2}+\sum_{i=1}^{3}\epsilon_{1}(i)F_{1}(i)+
83: \sum_{i=1}^{3}\epsilon_{2}(i)F_{2}(i) \ ,
84: \label{field2}
85: \end{equation}
86: where the quantities
87: \begin{eqnarray}
88: A_{2}&=&-\frac{i}{\sqrt{2}}(Y_{3\, 2}-Y_{3\, -2})
89: =\frac{1}{r^{3}}\sqrt{\frac{105}{4\pi}}xyz \ ,
90: \label{A2} \\
91: F_{1}(1)&=&Y_{3\, 0}=\frac{1}{r^{3}}\sqrt{\frac{7}{4\pi}}
92: z(z^{2}-\frac{3}{2}x^{2}-\frac{3}{2}y^{2}) \ , \\
93: F_{1}(2)&=&-\frac{1}{4}\sqrt{5}(Y_{3\, 3}-Y_{3\, -3})
94: +\frac{1}{4}\sqrt{3}(Y_{3\, 1}-Y_{3\, -1}) \nonumber \\
95: &=&\frac{1}{r^{3}}\sqrt{\frac{7}{4\pi}}
96: x(x^{2}-\frac{3}{2}y^{2}-\frac{3}{2}z^{2}) \ , \\
97: F_{1}(3)&=&-i\frac{1}{4}\sqrt{5}(Y_{3\, 3}+Y_{3\, -3})
98: -i\frac{1}{4}\sqrt{3}(Y_{3\, 1}+Y_{3\, -1}) \nonumber \\
99: &=&\frac{1}{r^{3}}\sqrt{\frac{7}{4\pi}}
100: y(y^{2}-\frac{3}{2}z^{2}-\frac{3}{2}x^{2})\ , \\
101: F_{2}(1)&=&\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(Y_{3\, 2}+Y_{3\, -2})
102: =\frac{1}{r^{3}}\sqrt{\frac{105}{16\pi}}
103: z(x^{2}-y^{2})\ , \\
104: F_{2}(2)&=&\frac{1}{4}\sqrt{3}(Y_{3\, 3}-Y_{3\, -3})
105: +\frac{1}{4}\sqrt{5}(Y_{3\, 1}-Y_{3\, -1}) \nonumber \\
106: &=&\frac{1}{r^{3}}\sqrt{\frac{105}{16\pi}}
107: x(y^{2}-z^{2})\ , \\
108: F_{2}(3)&=&-i\frac{1}{4}\sqrt{3}(Y_{3\, 3}+Y_{3\, -3})
109: +i\frac{1}{4}\sqrt{5}(Y_{3\, 1}+Y_{3\, -1}) \nonumber \\
110: &=&\frac{1}{r^{3}}\sqrt{\frac{105}{16\pi}}
111: y(z^{2}-x^{2}), \label{F23}
112: \end{eqnarray}
113: (with $r^{2}=x^{2}+y^{2}+z^{2}$) belong to the irreducible
114: representations (irreps) of the octahedron group ($O$). $A_{2}$
115: is one-dimensional, while $F_{1}$ and $F_{2}$ are
116: three-dimensional irreps. The seven real parameters $\epsilon_{0}$
117: and $\epsilon_{r}(i)$ ($r=1,2;\, i=1,2,3$) determine the
118: amplitudes of the octupole deformation. Their relation to the
119: $\alpha_{3\,\mu}^{fix}$ is given in \cite{Ham91}.
120:
121: Our proposition is that the general collective Hamiltonian which
122: incorporates the shape characteristics of the octupole field
123: (\ref{field2}) can be constructed on the basis of the above
124: octahedron irreps. For this purpose we introduce operator forms
125: of the quantities $A_{2}$, $F_{1}(i)$ and $F_{2}(i)$ ($i=1,2,3$)
126: in which the cubic terms of the Cartesian variables $x$, $y$ and
127: $z$ in Eqs~(\ref{A2})--(\ref{F23}) are replaced by appropriately
128: symmetrized combinations of cubic terms of the respective angular
129: momentum operators $\hat{I}_{x}$, $\hat{I}_{y}$, $\hat{I}_{z}$
130: (with $\hat{I}^{2}=\hat{I}_x^{2}+\hat{I}_y^{2}+\hat{I}_z^{2}$).
131: The following Hamiltonian is then obtained:
132: \begin{equation}
133: \hat{H}_{oct}=\hat{H}_{A_{2}}+
134: \sum_{r=1}^{2}\sum_{i=1}^{3}\hat{H}_{F_{r}(i)} \ ,
135: \label{Hoctgen}
136: \end{equation}
137: with
138: \begin{eqnarray}
139: \hat{H}_{A_{2}}&=&{a}_{2}\frac{1}{4}
140: [(\hat{I}_x\hat{I}_y+\hat{I}_y\hat{I}_x)\hat{I}_z+
141: \hat{I}_z(\hat{I}_x\hat{I}_y+\hat{I}_y\hat{I}_x)] \ ,
142: \label{HA} \\
143: \hat{H}_{F_{1}(1)}&=&\frac{1}{2}{f}_{11}
144: \hat{I}_z(5\hat{I}_z^{2}-3\hat{I}^{2}) \ ,
145: \label{HF11} \\
146: \hat{H}_{F_{1}(2)}&=&\frac{1}{2}{f}_{12}
147: (5\hat{I}_x^{3}-3\hat{I}_x\hat{I}^{2}) \ ,
148: \label{HF12} \\
149: \hat{H}_{F_{1}(3)}&=&\frac{1}{2}{f}_{13}
150: (5\hat{I}_y^{3}-3\hat{I}_y\hat{I}^{2}) \ ,
151: \label{HF13} \\
152: \hat{H}_{F_{2}(1)}&=&{f}_{21}\frac{1}{2}
153: [\hat{I}_z(\hat{I}_x^{2}-\hat{I}_y^{2})+
154: (\hat{I}_x^{2}-\hat{I}_y^{2})\hat{I}_z] \ ,
155: \label{HF21} \\
156: \hat{H}_{F_2(2)}&=&{f}_{22}
157: (\hat{I}_x\hat{I}^{2}-\hat{I}_x^{3}-
158: \hat{I}_x\hat{I}_z^{2}-\hat{I}_z^{2}\hat{I}_x) \ ,
159: \label{HF22} \\
160: \hat{H}_{F_2(3)}&=&{f}_{23}
161: (\hat{I}_y\hat{I}_z^{2}+\hat{I}_z^{2}\hat{I}_y+
162: \hat{I}_y^{3}-\hat{I}_y\hat{I}^{2})
163: \label{HF23}
164: \end{eqnarray}
165: The Hamiltonian parameters ${a}_{2}$ and ${f}_{r\, i}$ ($r=1,2;\,
166: i=1,2,3$) are formally related to the parameters in
167: (\ref{field2}) as follows ${a}_{2}=\epsilon_{0}\sqrt{105/(4\pi)}$,
168: ${f}_{1\, i}=\epsilon_{1}(i)\sqrt{7/(4\pi)}$, ${f}_{2\,
169: i}=\epsilon_{2}(i)\sqrt{105/(16\pi)}$, $i=1,2,3$.
170:
171: During the procedure described above, the $r^3$ factors appearing
172: in the denominators of Eqs~(\ref{A2})--(\ref{F23}) are replaced by
173: $\hat I^3$ factors. In the final result,
174: Eqs~(\ref{HA})--(\ref{HF23}), we normalize with respect to $\hat
175: I^3$, i.e. we multiply the results by $\hat I^3$, an operation
176: which is equivalent to the transition to a unit sphere, a natural
177: thing to do since we are interested in surface shapes.
178:
179: We remark that the terms of the Hamiltonian obtained (as a
180: function of the angular momentum operators $\hat I_x$, $\hat
181: I_y$, $\hat I_z$) correspond to the same octupole shapes which
182: appear in Eqs~(\ref{A2})--(\ref{F23}) and belong to the same
183: irreps of the octahedron group. In other words, through the
184: above procedure we determine the octahedron point symmetry
185: properties of the system in angular momentum space.
186:
187: Our analysis shows that the operator $\hat{H}_{F_{1}(1)}$,
188: Eq.~(\ref{HF11}), which corresponds to $Y_{3\, 0}$ (with axial
189: deformation) is the only one octupole operator possessing diagonal
190: matrix elements in the states with collective angular momentum
191: $I$. Below it will be shown that it is of major importance for
192: determining the fine structure of collective bands with octupole
193: correlations. Actually, it is well known that the $Y_{3\, 0}$
194: (axial) deformation is the leading mode in the systems with
195: reflection asymmetric shape (See for review \cite{BN96}).
196:
197: Further, it is known that the use of the pure octupole field
198: (\ref{field2}) is not sufficient to incorporate the collective
199: shape properties of the system. More specifically a unique
200: parametrization of the pure octupole field in an intrinsic
201: frame has not been obtained yet in a consistent way \cite{BN96}.
202: In this respect the consideration of octupole degrees of freedom
203: together with the quadrupole deformations is important. A general
204: treatment of a combined quadrupole-octupole field is proposed in
205: the framework of a general collective model for coupled multipole
206: surface modes \cite{Ro82,Ro88}.
207:
208: Based on the above consideration we suggest that the most general
209: collective Hamiltonian of a system with octupole correlations should
210: contain also the standard (axial) quadrupole rotation part
211: \begin{equation}
212: \hat{H}_{rot}= A\hat{I}^{2}+A'\hat{I}_{z}^{2} \ ,
213: \label{Hrot}
214: \end{equation}
215: where $A$ and $A'$ are the inertial parameters.
216: In addition the following higher order diagonal quadrupole-octupole
217: interaction term (corresponding to the product $Y_{2\, 0}\cdot Y_{3\,
218: 0}$) could be introduced:
219: \begin{equation}
220: \hat{H}_{qoc}=f_{qoc}\frac{1}{I^{2}}(15\hat{I}_{z}^{5}-
221: 14\hat{I}_{z}^{3}\hat{I}^{2}+
222: 3\hat{I}_{z}\hat{I}^{4}) \ .
223: \label{Hqoc}
224: \end{equation}
225: This operator is normalized with respect to the multiplication
226: factor $I^3$. (More precisely we use the product $I^3Y_{2\, 0}\cdot
227: Y_{3\, 0}$) so as to keep all non-quadrupole Hamiltonian terms of
228: the same order.)
229:
230: Then the Hamiltonian of the system can be written as
231: \begin{equation}
232: \hat{H}=\hat{H}_{bh}+\hat{H}_{rot}+\hat{H}_{oct}+
233: \hat{H}_{qoc} \ .
234: \label{Hgen}
235: \end{equation}
236: Here
237: \begin{equation}
238: \hat{H}_{bh}=\hat{H}_{0}+f_{k}\hat{I}_{z} \ ,
239: \end{equation}
240: is a pure phenomenological part introduced to reproduce the bandhead
241: energy in the form
242: \begin{equation}
243: E_{bh}=E_{0}+f_{k}K \ ,
244: \end{equation}
245: were $E_{0}$ and $f_{k}$ are free parameters. The $K$-dependence of
246: $E_{bh}$, which can be reasonably referred to the intrinsic
247: motion, provides the correct value of the bandhead angular momentum
248: projection $K$ in the variation procedure described below.
249:
250: We remark that the Hamiltonian (\ref{Hgen}) is not a rotational
251: invariant in general. It does not commute with the total angular
252: momentum operators and any state with given angular momentum is
253: energy split with respect to the quantum number $K$. Therefore, the
254: physical relevance of this Hamiltonian depends on the possibility to
255: determine in an unique way the angular momentum projection. The basic
256: assumption of our consideration is that K is not frozen within the
257: states of the collective rotational band. We suggest that for any
258: given angular momentum it should be determined so as to minimize the
259: respective collective energy. The resulting energy spectrum
260: represents the yrast sequence of energy levels for our model
261: Hamiltonian. We remark that similar procedure is used in Refs.
262: \cite{HM,MQ} in reference to the $\Delta I=2$ staggering effect in
263: superdeformed nuclei.
264:
265: As a first step in testing our Hamiltonian we consider its diagonal
266: part
267: \begin{equation}
268: \hat{H}^{d}=\hat{H}_{bh}+\hat{H}_{rot}+\hat{H}_{oct}^{d}+
269: \hat{H}_{qoc} \ .
270: \label{Hdiag}
271: \end{equation}
272: were the operator $\hat{H}_{oct}^{d}\equiv \hat{H}_{F_{1}(1)}$
273: represents the diagonal part of the pure octupole Hamiltonian
274: $\hat{H}_{oct}$, Eq.~(\ref{Hoctgen}).
275:
276: The following diagonal matrix element is then obtained:
277: \begin{eqnarray}
278: E_{K}(I)&=&E_{0}+f_{k}K+AI(I+1)+A'K^{2}+
279: f_{11}\left( \frac{5}{2}K^{3}-\frac{3}{2}KI(I+1)\right)
280: \nonumber \\
281: &+&f_{qoc}\frac{1}{I^{2}}
282: \left( 15K^{5}-14K^{3}I(I+1)+
283: 3KI^{2}(I+1)^{2}\right) \ .
284: \label{EKI}
285: \end{eqnarray}
286:
287: Following the above assumption for the third angular momentum
288: projection, we determine the yrast sequence $E(I)$ after
289: minimizing Eq.~(\ref{EKI}) as a function of integer $K$ in the range
290: $-I\leq K\leq I$. The obtained energy spectrum depends on six model
291: parameters: $E_{0}$ essentially responsible for the bandhead energy;
292: $f_{k}$ which provides minimal energy for $K=K_{bh}=I_{bh}$;
293: $A$ and $A'$ are the quadrupole inertial parameters which
294: should generally correspond to the known quadrupole shapes (axes
295: ratios) of nuclei; $f_{11}$ and $f_{qoc}$ are the parameters of the
296: diagonal octupole (\ref{HF11}) and quadrupole-octupole (\ref{Hqoc})
297: interactions respectively. We consider the latter two parameters as
298: free parameters.
299:
300: We applied several exemplary sets of the above parameters and
301: obtained the corresponding schematic energy spectra. One of them
302: is given in Table 1. It is seen that the ``yrast'' values of the
303: quantum number $K$ gradually increase with the increase of the
304: angular momentum $I$. We remark that they correspond to the local
305: minima of Eq.~(\ref{EKI}) as a function of $K$. This is
306: illustrated on Fig.~1. We see that these minimums are well
307: determined and their depth increases with the increase of the
308: angular momentum. Such a behavior of the spectrum corresponds to
309: a wobbling motion and could also be interpreted as a
310: multiband-crossing phenomenon. The obtained yrast sequence can be
311: considered as the envelope of the curves with different values of
312: the quantum number $K$ as it is illustrated in Fig.~2.
313:
314: In addition we see that the $K$- values of the odd and the even
315: sequence of levels are grouped by couples which imply the presence
316: of odd--even staggering effect. Indeed, the presence of such an
317: effect is demonstrated in Fig. 3 (a)--(e), where the quantity
318: \begin{equation}
319: Stg(I)= 6\Delta E(I)-4\Delta E(I-1)-4\Delta E(I+1)+
320: \Delta E(I+2)+\Delta E(I-2)\ ,
321: \label{stag}
322: \end{equation}
323: with $\Delta E(I)=E(I+1)-E(I)$, is plotted as a function of
324: angular momentum $I$ for several different sets of model
325: parameters. (The quantity $Stg(I)$ is the discrete approximation
326: of the fourth derivative of the function $\Delta E(I)$, i.e. the
327: fifth derivative of the energy $E(I)$. Its physical relevance has
328: been discussed extensively in Refs \cite{DBoct00,MDRRB00}.)
329:
330: Fig.~3(a) illustrates a long $\Delta I=1$ staggering pattern with
331: several irregularities, which looks similar to the ``beats''
332: observed in the octupole bands of some light actinides such as
333: $^{220}$Ra, $^{224}$Ra and $^{226}$Ra \cite{DBoct00}. Also, it is
334: rather similar to the staggering patterns observed in rotational
335: spectra of diatomic molecules \cite{RDM97}. In Fig.~3(b) the
336: increased values of $f_{11}$ and $f_{qoc}$ provide a wide angular
337: momentum region (up to $I\sim 40$) with a regular staggering
338: pattern. The further increase of $f_{qoc}$ results in a staggering
339: pattern with different amplitudes, shown in Fig.~3(c). These two
340: figures resemble the staggering behavior of some rotational
341: (negative parity) bands based on octupole vibrations
342: \cite{NMSDunp}. The further increase of $f_{11}$ and $f_{qoc}$
343: leads to a staggering pattern with many ``beats'', as shown in
344: Fig~3(d). Notice that in Fig. 3(d) the first three ``beats'' are
345: completed by $I\approx 40$, while in Fig. 3(a) the first three
346: ``beats'' are completed by $I\approx 70$. An example with almost
347: constant staggering amplitude is shown in Fig.~3(e). It resembles
348: the form of the odd--even staggering predicted in the SU(3) limit
349: of various algebraic models (see Ref. \cite{DBoct00} for details
350: and relevant references). It also resembles the odd--even
351: staggering seen in some octupole bands of light actinides, such
352: as $^{222}$Rn \cite{DBoct00}.
353:
354: Now we can discuss the general Hamiltonian structure (\ref{Hgen})
355: including the various non-diagonal terms (\ref{HA}),
356: (\ref{HF12})--(\ref{HF23}). Here, the major problem is the
357: circumstance that $K$ is generally not a good quantum number.
358: However we are able to provide our analysis for small values of
359: the respective parameters which conserve $K$ ``asymptotically''
360: good. This requirement assumes a weak $K$-bandmixing interaction
361: which guarantees that for any explicit energy minimum appearing
362: in the diagonal case the corresponding perturbed Hamiltonian
363: eigenvalue will be uniquely determined. Thus we are able to obtain
364: respective $K$-mixed yrast energy sequence. Our numerical analysis
365: of the Hamiltonian eigenvector systems shows that the parameters
366: of the non-diagonal terms should be by a order smaller in value
367: than the parameter $f_{11}$. In addition, we established that the
368: following couples of non-diagonal terms give the same
369: contribution in the energy spectrum: $\hat{H}_{A_{2}}$ and
370: $\hat{H}_{F_{2}(1)}$; $\hat{H}_{F_{1}(2)}$ and
371: $\hat{H}_{F_{1}(3)}$; $\hat{H}_{F_{2}(2)}$ and
372: $\hat{H}_{F_{2}(3)}$.
373:
374: In Fig.~3(f) a staggering pattern with a presence of
375: $K$-bandmixing is illustrated. In fact we added the following
376: three non-diagonal terms $\hat{H}_{F_{1}(2)}$,
377: $\hat{H}_{F_{2}(1)}$ and $\hat{H}_{F_{2}(2)}$ to the already
378: considered diagonal Hamiltonian (\ref{Hdiag}), with the
379: parameters of the latter being kept the same as in Fig.~3(b) (and
380: in Table~1). We see that the mixing leads to a decrease in the
381: staggering amplitude with the increase of angular momentum so
382: that the staggering pattern is reduced completely in the higher
383: spin region. This pattern resembles the experimental situation
384: in $^{218}$Rn and $^{228}$Th \cite{DBoct00} (odd--even staggering
385: with amplitude decreasing as a function of $I$).
386:
387: So, the staggering patterns illustrated so far (Fig.~3) cover
388: almost all known $\Delta I=1$ staggering patterns in nuclei and
389: molecules. The amplitudes obtained for the examined sets of
390: parameters vary up to $300$ keV. Some reasonable theoretical
391: patterns with $Stg(I)\sim 500$keV can be easily obtained. On this
392: basis we suppose that the model parameters can be adjusted
393: appropriately so as to reproduce the staggering effects in nuclear
394: octupole bands as well as in some rotational negative parity bands
395: built on octupole vibrations. Also, an application of the present
396: formalism to the spectra of diatomic molecules could be
397: reasonable.
398:
399: Here the following comments on the structure of the collective
400: interactions used and the related symmetries would be relevant:
401:
402: 1) The equal contribution of the three couples of non-diagonal
403: terms (mentioned above) indicates that only four octupole
404: Hamiltonian terms are enough to determine the energy spectrum.
405: This result reflects the circumstance that in the intrinsic
406: frame three octupole degrees of freedom, from the seven ones, are
407: related to the orientation angles. For example we could suggest
408: that the following terms [applied in Fig.~3(f)] give an
409: independent contribution in the total Hamiltonian:
410: $\hat{H}_{F_{1}(1)}$, $\hat{H}_{F_{1}(2)}$, $\hat{H}_{F_{2}(1)}$
411: and $\hat{H}_{F_{2}(2)}$. We remark that our analysis (related to
412: the collective rotations of the system) gives a natural way to
413: determine the four collective octupole interaction terms.
414:
415: 2) From symmetry point of view we remark that the diagonal term
416: $\hat{H}_{F_{1}(1)}$ which corresponds to $Y_{3\, 0}$ possesses an
417: axial symmetry while the non-diagonal terms $\hat{H}_{F_{1}(2)}$,
418: $\hat{H}_{F_{2}(1)}$ and $\hat{H}_{F_{2}(2)}$ (of previous item
419: 1)) are constructed by using the combinations $(Y_{3\, 1}-Y_{3\,
420: -1})$ with C$_{2v}$ symmetry, $(Y_{3\, 2}+Y_{3\, -2})$ with
421: T$_{d}$ symmetry and $(Y_{3\, 3}-Y_{3\, -3})$ with D$_{3h}$
422: symmetry. So, our analysis shows that the axial symmetric term
423: should play the major role in the structure of the collective
424: rotational Hamiltonian while the non-axial parts could be
425: considered as small $K$-band-mixing interactions. From
426: microscopic point of view, a detailed analysis of the above
427: spherical harmonic combinations and the respective symmetries has
428: been provided on the basis of the one particle spectra of the
429: octupole-coupled two-level model \cite{HBXZ91}.
430:
431: 3) The observed influence of the non-diagonal Hamiltonian terms on
432: the fine structure of our ``schematic'' spectra suggests an
433: important physical conclusion: the non-diagonal $K$- mixing
434: interactions suppress the staggering pattern. In such a way we
435: find that the axial symmetric term $\hat{H}_{F_{1}(1)}$ is the
436: only one pure octupole degree of freedom which provides ``beat''
437: staggering behavior of the quantity (\ref{stag}) (See Fig.~3(e)).
438: (The quadrupole--octupole term $\hat{H}_{qoc}$ gives an
439: additional contribution and provides wider angular momentum
440: regions with regular staggering.) So, our analysis suggests that
441: the $\Delta I=1$ staggering effect observed in systems with
442: octupole deformations could be referred to the dominant role of
443: the axial symmetric ``pear-like'' shape.
444:
445: In addition, it is important to remark that the fine (staggering)
446: behavior of our schematic energy spectra reflects the structure of
447: the interactions considered through the K- sequences generated in
448: the above minimization procedure. Thus our analysis suggests that
449: in the high angular momentum region some high K band structures
450: should be involved. From microscopic point of view the values
451: $K=0$, 1, 2, 3 have been included in calculations, showing that
452: in the beginning of the rare earth region the values $K=0$, 1 are
453: important for the lowest $3^-$ state, while in the middle of the
454: region the values $K=1$, 2 are important and in the far end of
455: the region the values $K=2$, 3 are important \cite{NV70a}. The
456: same authors deal with nuclei with $A\geq 222$ in Ref.
457: \cite{NV70a}. One of the authors of Refs. \cite{NV70a,NV70b} in
458: Ref. \cite{V70} finds that the restriction to $K\leq 3$ is not
459: justifiable for large energies. This is in agreement with our
460: findings of Table 1.
461:
462: In conclusion, we remark that the collective interactions
463: considered in this work suggest the presence of various fine
464: rotational band structures in quantum mechanical systems with
465: collective octupole correlations. In particular, they provide
466: various forms of staggering patterns which appear as the results
467: of a delicate interplay between the terms of pure octupole field
468: and the terms of high order quadrupole--octupole interaction. The
469: analysis carried out outlines the dominant role of the axial
470: symmetric ``pear-like'' shape for the presence of a $\Delta I=1$
471: staggering effect. The obtained multi K- band crossing structures
472: could be referred to a wobbling collective motion of the system.
473: We propose that the interactions involved would provide a
474: relevant handle in the study of collective phenomena in nuclei
475: and other quantum mechanical systems with complex shape
476: correlations.
477:
478: \bigskip
479: \noindent {\bf Acknowledgments}
480: \medskip
481:
482: This work has been supported by the Bulgarian National Fund for
483: Scientific Research under contract no MU--F--02/98. We are grateful
484: to Prof. P. Quentin for the illuminating discussions.
485:
486: \newpage
487:
488: \begin{thebibliography}{xx}
489: \bibitem{BM75} Bohr, A. and Mottelson, B. R., {\it Nuclear
490: Stucture}, vol. II, New York: Benjamin, 1975
491:
492: \bibitem{BN96} Butler, P. A. and Nazarewicz, W., {\it Rev. Mod.
493: Phys.}, 1996, vol.68, p.349
494:
495: \bibitem{Ro90} Rohozinski, S. G., {\it J. Phys. G},
496: 1990, vol.16, L173
497:
498: \bibitem{Ham91} Hamamoto, I., Zhang, X. and Xie, H., {\it Phys. Lett
499: B}, 1991, vol.257, p.1
500:
501: \bibitem{WD99} Wexler, C., Dussel, G. G., {\it Phys. Rev. C},
502: 1999, vol.60, p.014305
503:
504: \bibitem{DBoct00} Bonatsos, D., Daskaloyannis, C., Drenska, S. B.,
505: Karoussos, N., Minkov, N., Raychev, P. P. and Roussev, R. P., {\it
506: Phys. Rev. C}, 2000, in press
507:
508: \bibitem{Ro82} Rohozinski, S. G., Gajda, M. and Greiner, W.,
509: {\it J. Phys. G}, 1982, vol.8, p.787
510:
511: \bibitem{Ro88} Rohozinski, S. G., {\it Rep. Prog. Phys.}, 1988,
512: vol. 51, p. 541
513:
514: \bibitem{HM} Hamamoto, I. and Mottelson, B., {\it Phys. Lett. B},
515: 1994, vol.333, p.294
516:
517: \bibitem{MQ} Mikhailov, I. N. and Quentin, P., {\it Phys. Rev. Lett.},
518: 1995, vol.74, p.3336
519:
520: \bibitem{MDRRB00} Minkov, N., Drenska, S., Raychev, P., Roussev, R.
521: and Bonatsos, D., {\it Phys. Rev. C}, 2000, vol.61, p.064301
522:
523: \bibitem{RDM97} Raychev, P., Drenska, D. and Maruani, J.,
524: {\it Phys. Rev. A}, 1997, vol.56, p.2759
525:
526: \bibitem{NMSDunp} Minkov, N. and Drenska, S., work in progress.
527:
528: \bibitem{HBXZ91} Hamamoto, I., Mottelson, B., Xie, H. and Zhang,
529: X. Z., {\it Z. Phys. D}, 1991, vol.21, p.163
530:
531: \bibitem{NV70a} Neerg\aa rd, K. and Vogel, P., {\it Nucl. Phys. A},
532: 1970, vol.145, p.33
533:
534: \bibitem{NV70b} Neerg\aa rd, K. and Vogel, P., {\it Nucl. Phys. A},
535: 1970, vol.149, p.217
536:
537: \bibitem{V70} Vogel, P., {\it Phys. Lett. B}, 1976, vol.60, p.431
538:
539: \end{thebibliography}
540:
541: \newpage
542:
543: \begin{center}
544: {\bf Figure Captions}
545: \end{center}
546: \bigskip\bigskip
547:
548: \noindent {\bf Figure 1.} The diagonal energy matrix element
549: $E_{K}(I)$ (in MeV), Eq.~(\protect\ref{EKI}), is plotted as a
550: function of $K$ for $I=1,2,...,10$, for the parameter set
551: $E_{0}=500$keV, $f_{k}=-7.5$keV, $A=12$keV, $A'=6.6$keV,
552: $f_{11}=0.56$keV, $f_{qoc}=0.085$keV.
553: \bigskip
554:
555: \noindent {\bf Figure 2.} The diagonal energy matrix element
556: $E_{K}(I)$ (in MeV), Eq.~(\protect\ref{EKI}), is plotted as a
557: function of $I$ for $K=10,11,12,13$, for the parameter set of
558: Figure 1.
559: \bigskip
560:
561: \noindent {\bf Figure 3.} $\Delta I=1$ staggering patterns
562: [Eq.~(\protect\ref{stag})] obtained: (a) -- (e) by the diagonal
563: Hamiltonian (\ref{Hdiag}) for several different sets of model
564: parameters; (f) by adding three non-diagonal terms
565: $\hat{H}_{F_{1}(2)}$ [Eq.~(\ref{HF12})], $\hat{H}_{F_{2}(1)}$
566: [Eq.~(\ref{HF21})] and $\hat{H}_{F_{2}(2)}$ [Eq.~(\ref{HF22})] to
567: the diagonal Hamiltonian (\ref{Hdiag}).
568: \bigskip
569:
570: %\newpage
571:
572: \begin{table}
573: \caption{The ``yrast'' energy levels, $E(I)$ (in KeV), and the
574: respective $K$- values obtained by Eq.~(\protect\ref{EKI}) for the
575: parameter set $E_{0}=500$keV, $f_{k}=-7.5$keV, $A=12$keV,
576: $A'=6.6$keV, $f_{11}=0.56$keV, $f_{qoc}=0.085$keV.}
577:
578: \bigskip
579: \begin{center}
580: \begin{tabular}{ccccccccc}
581: \rule{0em}{2.2ex}
582: \\
583: \hline\hline
584: $I$&$E(I)$&$K$&$I$&$E(I)$&$K$&$I$&$E(I)$&K \\
585: \hline
586: 1 & 522.772& 1& 13& 2335.81& 5 & 25& 5453.12& 11 \\
587: 2 & 568.327& 1& 14& 2576.57& 6 & 26& 5694.49& 12 \\
588: 3 & 637.095& 1& 15& 2827.57& 6 & 27& 5935.5 & 12 \\
589: 4 & 728.71 & 1& 16& 3082.36& 7 & 28& 6157.5 & 13 \\
590: 5 & 840.857& 2& 17& 3344.94& 7 & 29& 6378.29& 13 \\
591: 6 & 971.155& 2& 18& 3608.18& 8 & 30& 6575.37& 14 \\
592: 7 & 1123.22& 2& 19& 3877.05& 8 & 31& 6770.62& 14 \\
593: 8 & 1288.09& 3& 20& 4143.16& 9 & 32& 6937.23& 15 \\
594: 9 & 1472.71& 3& 21& 4413.03& 9 & 33& 7101.62& 15 \\
595: 10& 1668.56& 4& 22& 4676.45& 10& 34& 7232.21& 16 \\
596: 11& 1880.56& 4& 23& 4942.01& 10& 35& 7360.44& 16 \\
597: 12& 2101.68& 5& 24& 5197.18& 11& 36& 7449.45& 17 \\
598: \hline\hline
599: \end{tabular}
600: \end{center}
601: \label{tab:spect}
602: \end{table}
603:
604: \ \ \ \ \ \
605:
606: \end{document}
607:
608: