1: % ****** Start of file apssamp.tex ******
2: %
3: % This file is part of the APS files in the REVTeX 4 distribution.
4: % Version 4.0 of REVTeX, August 2001
5: %
6: % Copyright (c) 2001 The American Physical Society.
7: %
8: % See the REVTeX 4 README file for restrictions and more information.
9: %
10: % TeX'ing this file requires that you have AMS-LaTeX 2.0 installed
11: % as well as the rest of the prerequisites for REVTeX 4.0
12: %
13: % See the REVTeX 4 README file
14: % It also requires running BibTeX. The commands are as follows:
15: %
16: % 1) latex apssamp.tex
17: % 2) bibtex apssamp
18: % 3) latex apssamp.tex
19: % 4) latex apssamp.tex
20: %
21: \documentclass[twocolumn,showpacs,preprintnumbers,amsmath,amssymb]{revtex4}
22: %\documentclass[preprint,showpacs,preprintnumbers,amsmath,amssymb]{revtex4}
23:
24: % Some other (several out of many) possibilities
25: %\documentclass[preprint,aps]{revtex4}
26: %\documentclass[preprint,aps,draft]{revtex4}
27: %\documentclass[prb]{revtex4}% Physical Review B
28:
29: \usepackage{graphicx}% Include figure files
30: \usepackage{dcolumn}% Align table columns on decimal point
31: \usepackage{bm}% bold math
32:
33: %\nofiles
34:
35: \begin{document}
36:
37: \preprint{APS/123-QED}
38:
39: \title{Theoretical study of one-proton removal from $^{15}$O.}% Force line breaks with \\
40:
41: \author{Y. L. Parfenova}
42: \email{Yulia.Parfenova@ulb.ac.be}
43: \affiliation{%
44: Physique Nucl\'eaire Th\'eorique et
45: Physique Math\'ematique, CP229, Universit\'e Libre de Bruxelles
46: B 1050 Brussels, Belgium.}
47: \altaffiliation[Also at ]{ Skobeltsyn Institute of Nuclear Physics, Moscow State
48: University, 119992 Moscow, Russia}%Lines break automatically or can be forced with \\
49: \author{M.V. Zhukov}%
50: % \email{mikhail.zhukov@fy.chalmers.se}
51: \affiliation{%
52: Fundamental Physics, Chalmers University of Technology,
53: S-41296 G\"{o}teborg, Sweden\\
54: %This line break forced with \textbackslash\textbackslash
55: }%
56:
57: %\author{Charlie Author}
58: % \homepage{http://www.Second.institution.edu/~Charlie.Author}
59: %\affiliation{
60: %Second institution and/or address\\
61: %This line break forced% with \\
62: %}%
63:
64: \date{\today}% It is always \today, today,
65: % but any date may be explicitly specified
66:
67: \begin{abstract}
68: One-proton removal from $^{15}$O at intermediate energies (56 A
69: MeV) is studied in the eikonal approximation of the Glauber model.
70: The production of the $^{14}$N core fragment in the ground and
71: excited states is regarded. The calculated proton removal cross
72: section, the $^{15}$O interaction cross section, and the
73: longitudinal momentum distribution of the $^{14}$N fragments are
74: compared to recent experimental data \cite{Jep04}.
75: \end{abstract}
76:
77:
78: \pacs{21.60.Gx; 25.60.Dz; 25.60.Gc}% PACS, the Physics and Astronomy
79: % Classification Scheme.
80: \keywords{cluster model, interaction and reaction cross
81: sections, breakup and momentum distributions}%Use showkeys class option if keyword
82: %display desired
83: \maketitle
84:
85:
86:
87: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
88: \section{Introduction \label{secI}}
89: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
90:
91: During the last decade two-proton emitters and proton-rich nuclei,
92: in the vicinity of the proton drip-line, are subjects of intensive
93: experimental and theoretical studies. In particular the study of
94: %The last years study of the two-proton emitter and
95: a candidate to possess a two-proton halo in the ground state,
96: namely the Borromean $^{17}$Ne nucleus is of special experimental
97: and theoretical interest (see, for example, discussions in
98: \cite{zhu95,kan03,Gri05}). The inherent feature of the halo
99: structure is a relatively small separation energy of a valence
100: nucleon. It reveals itself in a large valence nucleon removal
101: cross section and a narrow core longitudinal momentum (LM)
102: distribution.
103:
104: In the case of $^{17}$Ne the proton removal cross section,
105: measured at the energy 66 A MeV on a Be target \cite{kan03}, is
106: relatively large compared to the cluster model ($^{15}$O$+p+p$)
107: predictions \cite{Gri05}. At the same time, the measured core LM
108: distribution is wider than the calculated one. Both these facts
109: can be attributed to contribution of a proton removal from the
110: $^{15}$O core in $^{17}$Ne if this cross section is relatively
111: large.
112:
113: %In Ref. \cite{Gri05}, this contribution was estimated of
114: %about 50\%.
115:
116: Recently the $^{14}$N longitudinal momentum (LM) distribution and
117: break-up cross section (into the $^{14}$N+p channel) have been
118: measured in fragmentation of $^{15}$O on a Be target at the energy
119: 56 A MeV \cite{Jep04}. This opens a possibility for more precise
120: calculations of the proton removal from $^{17}$Ne and evaluations
121: of the contribution of the proton removal from the $^{15}$O core
122: to this process.
123:
124: In this paper, we present a detailed analysis of the $^{15}$O
125: break-up in light targets. We perform the calculations in the
126: eikonal approximation of the Glauber model
127: \cite{Hen96,Esbens1,Esb00,Par00}. This approach is well developed
128: and convenient for calculations of break-up cross sections,
129: interaction cross sections, and momentum distributions of
130: fragments in break-up of a nucleus at intermediate and high
131: energies (from 30 to 1000 A MeV).
132:
133: The formalism for the calculations is described in Section
134: \ref{secII}. The main ingredients of the Glauber model are the
135: wave function of the relative motion of the fragments and the
136: profile functions defining the fragment-target interaction. They
137: are fixed using experimental data on the nucleon-nucleus and
138: nucleus-nucleus cross sections, proton separation energies, the
139: level scheme of the core nucleus, etc. In particular, the profile
140: functions are fitted using the nucleus-nucleus and nucleon-nucleus
141: interaction cross sections.
142:
143: The wave function is obtained in the core+proton
144: ($^{14}$N+$p$) model of $^{15}$O, where the $^{14}$N
145: core fragment can be in the ground and excited states
146: (see, for example, Ref. \cite{Par00}).
147: %$^{15}$O is a $p$-shell nucleus.
148: %In the core+proton model, the
149: %$^{15}$O ground state
150: %is composed by the $p$-wave valence proton states.
151: The $p$-wave proton removal from $^{15}$O ($J^{\pi}=1/2^-$)
152: leads to few $^{14}$N bound states. We consider four of them (for
153: details see \cite{Sne69}): $E_x=0.0$ MeV ($J^{\pi}=1^+$, $T=0$),
154: $E_x=2.313$ MeV ($0^+$, $1$), $E_x=3.948$ MeV ($1^+$, $0$), and
155: $E_x=7.029$ MeV ($2^+$, $0$). Here, $E_x$ is the excitation energy
156: and ($J^{\pi}$, $T$) are the spin and isospin of the $^{14}$N
157: state. For each state, the depth of the ($^{14}$N+$p$) interaction
158: potential (see, below) is fitted to reproduce the proton
159: separation energy.
160:
161: The cross sections of the proton removal from
162: the $^{15}$O ground state
163: %wave function
164: are determined by the spectroscopic factors \cite{Sne69,Coh67}
165: of the $p$-wave proton states.
166:
167: %For each state, the wave function of the $p$-$^{14}$N relative
168: %motion is fitted to reproduce the proton separation energy. It
169: %should satisfy the measured $^{15}$O interaction cross section
170: %with light target nuclei, in particular, be compatible with the
171: %$^{15}$O rms radius values suggested in Refs. \cite{Oza01,War05}.
172:
173: In Section \ref{secIII} we fit the profile functions in
174: calculations of the corresponding nucleus-nucleus and
175: proton-nucleus interaction cross sections, and compare results to
176: the available experimental data.
177: %We also
178: %estimate the value of the rms matter radius of $^{15}$O
179: %which satisfy the experimental data on the interaction
180: %cross sections.
181:
182: In Section \ref{secIV} we present the calculated cross sections
183: and longitudinal momentum distributions of the $^{14}$N fragments
184: produced in various states in the process of the one-proton
185: removal from $^{15}$O on a $^{9}$Be target. These results are
186: compared to the experimental data on the $^{14}$N longitudinal
187: momentum distribution and the break-up cross section measured at
188: the energy 56 A MeV \cite{Jep04}.
189:
190:
191: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
192: \section{Cross sections and momentum distributions \label{secII}}
193: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
194: In the core-nucleon model of the projectile nucleus, the initial
195: state is described by the wave function (WF) $\Psi
196: _{JM_J}(\vec{r})$ of the core-nucleon relative motion with a total
197: angular momentum $J$ and its projection $M_J$. The WF depends on
198: the relative coordinate $\vec{r}$ between nucleon and core.
199:
200: After
201: interaction with a target, the WF of the projectile will be
202: corrected by factors, connected with nucleon-target and
203: core-target interactions. Thus, the WF in the projectile rest
204: frame is modified as \cite{Hen96}
205: \begin{equation}
206: \Psi (\vec{r},\vec{R})= \,S_{c}(b_{c})S_{n}(b_{n})\Psi _{JM_J}(\vec{r}), \label{WF}
207: \end{equation}
208: where $\vec{R}$ is the coordinate of the center of mass of
209: the projectile, $b_{i}=|\vec{b}_{i}|$ ($i=n,c$),
210: and $\vec{b}_{n}$, $\vec{b}_{c}$ are the transverse two
211: dimensional impact parameters of the nucleon
212: and the core with respect to the target nucleus, i.e.
213: $\vec{b}_{n}=\vec{R}_{\perp }+\vec{r}_{\perp }A_{c}/(A_{c}+1)$
214: and $\vec{b}_{c}=\vec{R}_{\perp }-\vec{r}_{\perp }/(A_{c}+1)$,
215: where $\vec{R}_{\perp }$ and $\vec{r}_{\perp }$
216: are components, perpendicular to the beam direction taken
217: as $z$ axis, and $A_{c}$ is the mass number of the core.
218: The profile functions $S_{n}(b_{n})$ and $S_{c}(b_{c})$ are
219: generated by nucleon and core interactions with the
220: target nucleus.
221: %$k_0$ is the momentum of the projectile
222: %nucleus moving along the z-axis.
223:
224: The fragmentation includes nucleon stripping and
225: diffraction processes.
226: The corresponding cross sections are given by the
227: equations \cite{Hen96}
228: \begin{widetext} %-----------------------------
229: \begin{eqnarray}
230: \sigma _{str} &=&{\frac{1}{2L+1}}\sum_{M}\,\int d\vec{R}_{\perp
231: }\;\int d\;\vec{r}\;\Psi _{LM}^{\ast }(\vec{r})\;(\,1-|S_{n}|^{2})%
232: \;|S_{c}|^{2}\;\Psi _{LM}(\vec{r}) \nonumber \\
233: \sigma _{diff} &=& {\frac{1}{2L+1}}\sum_{M}\, \int d\vec{R}%
234: _{\perp }\;\int d\;\vec{r}\;\Psi _{LM}^{\ast }(\vec{r}%
235: )\;|S_{n}S_{c}|^{2}\;\Psi _{LM}(\vec{r}) \label{CrSec} \\
236: &&-\frac{1}{2J+1} \sum_{MM^{\prime }}\int d\vec{R}_{\perp }\;\left| \int d\;\vec{r}\;\Psi
237: _{JM_J^{\prime }}^{\ast }(\vec{r})\;S_{n}S_{c}\;\Psi _{JM_J}(\vec{r}%
238: )\right| ^{2} . \nonumber
239: \end{eqnarray}
240: \end{widetext} %-----------------------------
241:
242: The proton removal cross section is found as the
243: sum $\sigma _{-p}=\sigma _{str}+\sigma _{diff}$ (\ref{CrSec}).
244:
245: The wave function $\Psi _{JM_J}$ is
246: \begin{equation}
247: \Psi _{JM_J}=\left[ \left[ \Psi _{LM}(\vec{r}) \otimes
248: \chi_{s_n m_n} \right]_{j_n} \otimes \chi_{s_c m_c} \right]_{JM_J} ,
249: \end{equation}
250: where $\chi_{s_c m_c}$ is the internal wave function of
251: the core including the spin function, $\chi_{s_n m_n}$ is
252: the spin function of the valence nucleon.
253:
254: We denote the part of the WF related to the relative motion as
255: $\Psi _{LM}$
256: \begin{equation}
257: \Psi _{LM}(\vec{r}) = R_{L}(r) Y_{LM},
258: \end{equation}
259: where $Y_{LM_L}$ is the spherical function.
260:
261: The radial part of the core-proton WF, $R_{L}(r)$, is obtained as
262: a solution of the Schr\"{o}dinger equation for the Woods-Saxon
263: potential (the Coulomb $^{14}N+p$ potential is also included). For
264: each state of $^{14}$N, the parameter $V_{0}$ of the Woods-Saxon
265: potential is fitted to reproduce the proton separation energy with
266: the fixed parameters $a_{0}=0.65$ fm and $R_{0}=1.25 A^{1/3}$=3.00 fm.
267: %The width parameter is chosen to be equal to the
268: %charge radius \cite{deV87} $r_c$ of the $^{14}$N core (the matter
269: %radius $r_m$ is related to the charge radius as
270: %$r_c^2=r_m^2+0.64$).
271: The depth parameters and the proton separation energies are given
272: in Table \ref{Tab1}.
273:
274:
275: In the calculations of the cross sections and LM distributions of
276: the fragments we consider the $p$ ($p_{1/2}$ and $p_{3/2}$) proton
277: removal. The $p$-wave proton removal from $^{15}$O leads to the
278: residual $^{14}$N core in the bound states $E_x=0.0$ MeV
279: ($J^{\pi}=1^+$, $T=0$), $E_x=2.313$ MeV ($0^+$, $1$) $E_x=3.948$
280: MeV ($1^+$, $0$), and $E_x=7.029$ MeV ($2^+$, $0$).
281:
282: Note, that the spectroscopic factors are not measured yet for
283: $^{15}$O.
284: %These weights can be found experimentally
285: %by measurement of the core fragments in coincidence with
286: %$\gamma$ -quanta, corresponding to the deexcitation of
287: %the $^{14}$N fragment.
288: As was shown in the DWBA analysis \cite{Bom71},
289: the contribution of the
290: protons with $l=1$ dominates
291: %and
292: %references therein)
293: in the proton transfer reaction leading to the ground state of
294: $^{15}$O.
295: %The spectroscopic factors of these states are discussed
296: %in [Jeppesen]. We use those obtained in Ref. {Coh67}.
297: %The separation energies are liste in Table \ref{Tab1}.
298: The spectroscopic factors of the states can be taken
299: as those predicted by Cohen and Kurath \cite{Coh67}.
300: %for the $^{14}$N energy levels.
301: These values are close to the measured values in the neutron
302: pickup reactions with the mirror $^{15}$N nucleus, the
303: $^{15}$N$(p,d)^{14}$N reaction with 40 MeV protons \cite{Sne69},
304: and the $^{15}$N$(d,t)^{14}$N reaction with 90 MeV deuterons
305: \cite{Sah89} (see the discussion in \cite{Jep04} and references
306: therein). We use the spectroscopic factors from \cite{Coh67} and
307: \cite{Sah89}. These factors $C^2S$ are also listed in Table
308: \ref{Tab1}.
309:
310:
311: \begin{table}[tbp]
312: \caption{\label{Tab1} The depth parameter $V_{0}$ of the
313: Woods-Saxon potential, obtained with the diffuseness parameter
314: $a_{0}=0.65$ fm and radius $R_0=3.00$ fm for the $p$-wave proton
315: separation energy $E_{s}$. $E_{x}$ is the corresponding $^{14}$N
316: core excitation energy. $C^{2}S$ are the spectroscopic factors,
317: $^a$ \cite{Coh67} and $^b$ \cite{Sah89}.}
318: \begin{ruledtabular}
319: \begin{tabular}{cccccc}
320: & & & & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Woods-Saxon potential} \\
321: $E_{x}$ & $^{14}$N & $C^{2}S^a$ & $C^{2}S^b$ & $V_{0}$ & $E_{s}$ \\
322: MeV & $(J^{\pi},T)$ & & & (MeV) & (MeV) \\ \hline
323: 0 & $(1^{+},0)$ & $1.459$ & $1.343$ & $-48.09$ & 7.297 \\
324: 2.313 & $(0^{+},1)$ & $0.418$ & $0.472$ & $-52.07$ & 9.610 \\
325: 3.948 & $(1^{+},0)$ & $0.696$ & $0.656$ & $-54.78$ & 11.245 \\
326: 7.029 & $(2^{+},0)$ & $1.250$ & $1.250$ & $-59.73$ & 14.326 \\
327: \end{tabular}
328: \end{ruledtabular}
329: %$^a$ Spectroscopic factors from \cite{Coh67} \\
330: %$^b$ Spectroscopic factors from \cite{Sah89}
331: \end{table}
332:
333: %In the calculations of the diffraction breakup we regard for
334: %three excited bound states of $^{15}$O - $E_{x1}$=5.183 MeV
335: %($J^{\pi}=1^+$, $E_s$=2.114 MeV, $2s_{1/2}$),
336: %$E_{x2}$=6.176 MeV ($J^{\pi}=1^+$, $E_s$=1.121 MeV $2p_{1/2}$),
337: %$E_{x3}$=6.793 MeV ($J^{\pi}=1^+$, $E_s$=0.504 MeV $2s_{1/2}$ or $1d_{5/2}$).
338: %These states are chosen in accordance with
339: %experimental data on the $^{15}$N$(\gamma,\gamma \prime)$
340: %reactions {Mor87}, where analogous states in the mirror
341: %$^{15}$N nucleus are mainly populated.
342:
343: Note, that the contribution of the $^{14}$N excited bound states
344: to the diffraction cross section (\ref{CrSec}) is relatively small
345: and is neglected here.
346:
347: The LM distributions of the core fragments are obtained by the
348: Fourier transformation of the core-proton WF, $R_{L}(r)$,
349: corrected for the core-target and nucleon-target interactions
350: %\begin{widetext} %-----------------------------
351: \begin{eqnarray}
352: {\frac{d\sigma _{str}}{dk_{z}}} &=&
353: \frac{1}{2L+1} \int \limits_0^{\infty} b_{n} db_{n}
354: (1-|S_{n}(b_{n})|^{2}) \nonumber \\
355: & & \int\limits_{0}^{\infty } r_{\perp }dr_{\perp} d \phi
356: |S_{c}(|\vec{b}_{n}-\vec{r}_{\perp }|)|^{2}
357: \label{distR} \\
358: & & \sum \limits_{M_L} \left| \int \limits_{-\infty }^{\infty}
359: e^{ik_{z}z}R_{L}\;(\sqrt{r_{\perp }^{2}+z^{2}})
360: Y_{LM_L} dz \right| ^2 . \nonumber
361: \end{eqnarray}
362: %\end{widetext} %-----------------------------
363:
364: The core longitudinal momentum distribution in the diffraction
365: breakup is assumed to be similar \cite{Hen96,Neg99}
366: to that of stripping.
367:
368: The expression (\ref{distR}) gives the contribution of the
369: LM distribution coming from each neutron-core state
370: composing the $^{15}$O ground
371: state wave function. For comparison with the experimental
372: data, we sum up these contributions weighted by the spectroscopic
373: factors (Table \ref{Tab1}).
374:
375: The fragment-target interaction cross section
376: is determined by the profile function $S_{\nu }(\vec{b}_{\nu })$ as
377: (\ref{profile}) as %{Oza01}
378: \begin{equation}
379: \sigma _{I}^{\nu }=\int d^{2}\vec{b}_{\nu }\,(\,1-|S_{\nu }(\vec{b}_{\nu
380: })|^{2}) , \label{FragRecCS}
381: \end{equation}
382: where index
383: $\nu $ denotes the fragment ($\nu =p$,$^{14}$N), $\vec{b}_{\nu }$
384: is the impact parameter of the $\nu$-th fragment.
385:
386: The interaction cross section for the fragmented projectile is
387: expressed through the profile functions of the fragment-target
388: interaction and the wave function of the relative motion of the
389: fragments.
390: %\begin{widetext} %-----------------------------
391: \begin{eqnarray}
392: \sigma _{I} &=& \frac{1}{2J+1}
393: \sum_{MM^{\prime }}\int d\vec{R}_{\perp } \label{IntSec} \\
394: &&\left[ 1-\left| \int d\;\vec{r}\;\Psi
395: _{JM_J^{\prime }}^{\ast }(\vec{r})\;S_{n}S_{c}\;\Psi _{JM_J}(\vec{r}%
396: )\right| ^{2} \right] . \nonumber
397: \end{eqnarray}
398: %\end{widetext} %-----------------------------
399:
400:
401:
402: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
403: \section{Profile functions
404: \label{secIII}}
405: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
406:
407: The profile function of the fragment-target interaction in
408: (\ref{WF}),(\ref{CrSec}), and (\ref{distR})
409: is determined as an integral
410: of the corresponding complex interaction potential
411: \begin{equation}
412: S_{\nu }(\vec{b}_{\nu })=\exp \left[ -\frac{i}{\hbar v}\int\limits_{-\infty
413: }^{\infty }dz\;\,V_{\nu T}\left( \sqrt{b_{\nu }^{2}+z^{2}}\right) \right] ,
414: \label{profile}
415: \end{equation}
416: where $V_{\nu T}(r)$ is the fragment-target interaction potential,
417: $v$ is the $^{15}$O beam velocity in the laboratory frame. The
418: fragment-target interaction potential is determined by folding of
419: the fragment density distribution and the nucleon-target
420: interaction potential.
421:
422: To calculate the nucleon-target interaction potential $V_{\nu
423: T}(r)$ ($\nu =n$, $p$) at energies less than 65 A MeV, we use the
424: parameters of the global nucleon-nucleus optical potential
425: \cite{OP1}. We also use the interaction potential \cite{Hen96}
426: generated from the free nucleon-nucleon ($NN$) interaction
427: \cite{NN1,NN2} valid at energies from 10 to 2000 A MeV. In this
428: case, the nucleon-target interaction potential is obtained by
429: folding of the target density distribution and the nucleon-nucleon
430: interaction potential.
431: %Thus, for energies
432: %less than 65 A MeV, we obtain the results with both
433: %interaction potentials.
434: For the details of the profile function calculations we
435: refer to \cite{Par00,Par02}.
436:
437: %Here, we assume that the density distributions
438: %$\rho _{C}$ and $\rho _{T}$ are similar to the corresponding
439: %charge distributions.
440:
441: %Note, that all the theoretical values of the nucleon-nucleus and
442: %nucleus-nucleus interaction cross section are compared with
443: %tabulated experimental data \cite{Bar93,NNDC}.
444:
445: For description of the target and fragment nuclear densities we
446: use different parametrizations. The $^9$Be and $^{14}$N densities
447: are parameterized in the harmonic oscillator model \cite{deV87}
448: \begin{equation}
449: \rho (r)=\rho _{0}[1+\alpha (r/a)^{2}]\exp (-(r/a)^{2})\;. \label{denHO}
450: \end{equation}
451: The parameter $\alpha$ is related to $a$ \cite{deV87}.
452: The parameter $\alpha$ is fitted (see the next Section) to
453: reproduce nucleon-nucleus and nucleus-nucleus interaction
454: cross sections.
455:
456: %The density distributions of the $^{14}$N core fragment is
457: %parametrized in the three-parameter Fermi model {deV87}
458: %\begin{equation}
459: %\rho (r)=\rho _{0}[1+wr^2/c^2]/(1+\exp ((r-c)/z))\; \label{den3pF}
460: %\end{equation}
461: %with the parameters $c=2.570$ fm,
462: %$z=0.5050$ fm, $w= -0.180$. The corresponding rms
463: %radius is 2.524 fm. In the calculations we vary the parameter
464: %$c$ to satisfy the experimental data on the nucleus-nucleus
465: %interaction cross sections.
466:
467: The $^{12}$C density distribution
468: is approximated by a sum of Gaussians \cite{deV87} as
469: %\begin{equation}
470: %\rho (r)=\textstyle\sum \limits_{i} A_{i}\left( e^{- (r-R_{i})^2/\gamma^2}
471: %+e^{- (r+R_{i})^2/\gamma^2}\right) \label{denGAF}
472: %\end{equation}
473: \begin{equation}
474: \rho (r)=\textstyle\sum \limits_{i} A_{i}\left(
475: e^{- (r-\beta R_{i})^2/\gamma^2}
476: +e^{- (r+\beta R_{i})^2/\gamma^2}\right) \label{denGAF}
477: \end{equation}
478: with the parameters from Ref. \cite{deV87}. In order to vary the
479: calculated cross section obtained with the density distribution
480: (\ref{denGAF}),
481: %to the experimental data on the nucleus-nucleus interaction cross section
482: we introduce a scaling factor
483: $\beta$ and replace $R_i$ by $\beta R_i$ in (\ref{denGAF}).
484:
485:
486: All the distributions $\rho $ are normalized to unity, and
487: $\rho _{0}$ is a normalization factor.
488:
489: %The parameters {Par00} for the density distributions
490: %defining the profile functions in (\ref{profile}) are
491: %fitted from the experimental data on the interaction
492: %cross sections.
493:
494: %In the eikonal approximation of the Glauber model, with a
495: %spectator core fragment, there
496: %is a simple relation between the nucleus-target
497: %($\sigma _{I}^{A}$), core-target ($\sigma _{I}^{A-\nu}$)
498: %interaction cross sections and the $\nu$ fragment removal
499: %cross section $\sigma _{-\nu}$
500: %\begin{equation}
501: %\sigma _{I}^{A}= \sigma _{I}^{A-\nu}+ \sigma _{-\nu} .
502: %\end{equation}
503: %Thus, knowing the interaction cross sections one can
504: %evaluate the fragment removal cross section.
505:
506: %The fragment-target profile function (\ref{profile})
507: %is obtained from the analysis of the proton-nucleus and
508: %nucleus-nucleus interaction cross sections. The density
509: %distributions $\rho(r)$ of the target and core
510: %nuclei are fitted to reproduce these cross sections.
511:
512: To fit the profile functions, corresponding experimental data for
513: interaction (reaction) cross sections on C and Be targets at
514: intermediate and high energies are used.
515:
516: % (Table \ref{Tab2}).
517:
518: In the case of $^{12}$C, the scaling parameter $\beta$ in
519: (\ref{denGAF}) is fitted to reproduce the experimental data for
520: $^{12}$C+$^{12}$C
521: \cite{Oza01,Sah86,She89,Wei03,Tan85,Kox85,Kox87,Jar87,Tan90,Bar93} and
522: $p+^{12}$C \cite{Bar93,NNDC} interaction cross sections. The best
523: fit is achieved for $\beta$=0.94. With this $\beta$ value the
524: $^{12}$C rms radius is 2.37 fm, that is close to the $^{12}$C rms
525: matter radius 2.33 fm
526: %, and less that the charge radius, 2.47 fm,
527: %and very close to that
528: obtained in \cite{Oza01}.
529:
530: Figures \ref{Fig1}a,1b show the calculated (dashed gray curves)
531: and measured (dots)
532: %\cite{Bar93,NNDC}
533: $p+^{12}$C and
534: $^{12}$C$+^{12}$C interaction cross sections at energies from 20
535: to 1000 A MeV. For comparison, the cross sections obtained with
536: the charge radius of carbon $r_c=2.47$ fm ($\beta$=1) are also given
537: in Fig. \ref{Fig1} (solid black curves).
538:
539: %%%%%%%% figure 1 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
540: \begin{figure}
541: \includegraphics{Fig1}% Here is how to import EPS art
542: \caption{\label{Fig1} The energy dependence of the $p$+$^{12}$C
543: and $^{12}$C+$^{12}$C interaction cross sections, $\sigma_I$,
544: calculated with the NN interaction potential. Dots in a) and b)
545: are the experimental data \cite{Bar93,NNDC} and
546: \cite{Oza01,Sah86,She89,Wei03,Tan85,Kox85,Kox87,Jar87,Tan90,Bar93},
547: respectively. The curves correspond to $\beta$=0.94 (dashed gray
548: lines) and $\beta$=1 (solid black lines). }
549: \end{figure}
550: %%%%%%%% figure 1 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
551:
552: The $^{9}$Be density parameter $a$ in (\ref{denHO}) is fitted to
553: reproduce the experimental data on the $p+^{9}$Be
554: \cite{Bar93,NNDC} and $^9$Be$+^9$Be \cite{Tan85} interaction
555: cross sections. The value $a=1.69$ fm corresponds the $^{9}$Be rms
556: radius 2.38 fm \cite{Oza01}.
557: %It is close to the $^{9}$Be matter
558: %radius, obtained with the charge radius from \cite{deV87}.
559: To have a measure of sensitivity of the results to the input
560: parameters of the model, we present the results of the
561: calculations with the parameter $a=1.79$ fm, also allowing a good
562: fit of the $^9$Be-nucleus cross section.
563:
564: In Figures \ref{Fig2}a and \ref{Fig2}b the calculated cross
565: sections are compared to the experimental data. These results are
566: also compared to the calculations with the Be rms radius equal to
567: the Be charge radius, 2.52 fm ($a=1.79$ fm) \cite{deV87}.
568:
569: The $p+^{9}$Be interaction cross section calculated with the
570: NN-interaction potential at energies less than 60 A MeV is
571: underestimated, while that obtained with the optical model
572: potential satisfy the experimental data. At higher energies, the
573: cross section calculated with the NN-interaction potential is in a
574: good agreement with the experimental data \cite{Bar93}.
575:
576: To test the fitted density parameters of the $^{12}$C and $^9$Be
577: we calculate the interaction cross section in the
578: $^{9}$Be+$^{12}$C reaction at the energy 790 A MeV. The value,
579: 818.7 mb, is very close to the experimental one 806(9) mb
580: \cite{Oza01}.
581:
582:
583: %%%%%%%% figure 2a %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
584: \begin{figure}
585: \includegraphics{Fig2}% Here is how to import EPS art
586: \caption{\label{Fig2} The energy dependence of the $p$+$^{9}$Be
587: and $^{9}$Be+$^{9}$Be interaction cross sections, $\sigma_I$. Dots
588: in a) and b) are the experimental data \cite{Bar93,NNDC} and
589: \cite{Tan85}, respectively. Dashed gray and
590: solid black lines are the calculations with the
591: NN interaction potential with the parameters $a=1.69$ and
592: $a=1.79$ fm. The solid grey line are the calculations with the
593: optical model potential (OMP).}
594: \end{figure}
595: %%%%%%%% figure 2a %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
596:
597: Using the experimental data on the $^{14}$N+p reaction
598: \cite{Bar93} and the $^{14}$N+$^{12}$C reaction at the energies
599: 39.3 \cite{Fan00} and 965 A MeV \cite{Oza01} we found $a=1.76$ fm
600: in the $^{14}$N density parametrization (\ref{denHO}). This value
601: corresponds to the $^{14}$N rms matter radius 2.44 fm known from
602: experiment.
603:
604:
605: The results of these calculations and the experimental data are
606: given in Fig. \ref{Fig3}. The cross sections calculated with the
607: NN interaction potential are in a better agreement with the
608: experimental data both for the proton-nucleus and the
609: nucleus-nucleus interaction cross sections than those obtained
610: with the optical model potential.
611:
612: For further calculations of the $^{15}$O break-up on a Be target
613: at the energy 56 A MeV
614: %the difference
615: %in the values of the interaction cross section is about
616: %30 mb, and there is no preferable choise of the interaction
617: %potential. In our calculations at low energies
618: we use profile functions obtained with the NN interaction
619: potential.
620:
621: With the $^{14}$N rms radius we can estimate
622: the $^{15}$O rms radius as
623: \begin{equation}
624: r_{m}^2(^{15}{\text O})=\frac{A_{c}A_p}{A^2} \left \langle
625: r_{c-p}^2 \right \rangle + \frac{A_c}{A}r_{m}^2(^{14}{\text N}) ,
626: \end{equation}
627: where $r_{c-p}$ is the distance of the valence proton from the
628: $^{14}$N center of mass, $A=A_c+A_p$ is the mass number of the
629: projectile, the valence proton mass number $A_p=1$.
630:
631: With the $^{14}$N rms matter radius $r_{m}=2.44$ fm, which
632: corresponds ($r_{c}^2=r_{m}^2+0.8^2$) to the charge radius
633: $r_{c}(^{14}$N$)= 2.57$ fm \cite{deV87}, and the rms $r_{c-p}$
634: distance of the proton $\left \langle r_{c-p}^2 \right
635: \rangle^{\frac{1}{2}}=3.15$ fm, the $^{15}$O rms matter radius is
636: $r_{m}(^{15}$O$)= 2.48$ fm. This value is consistent with the
637: values obtained in Refs. \cite{Oza01,War05}. The corresponding
638: $^{15}$O rms charge radius is $r_{c}(^{15}$O$)=2.61$ fm.
639:
640: \begin{table}[tbp]
641: \caption{\label{Tab2} The calculated ($\sigma_I$)
642: and measured ($\sigma_I^{exp}$) nucleus-nucleus
643: interaction cross sections.}
644: \begin{ruledtabular}
645: \begin{tabular}{ccccc}
646: Proj. & Target & E & $\sigma_I$ & $\sigma_I^{exp}$ \\
647: & & (MeV/u) & (mb) & (mb) \\ \hline
648: $^{15}$O & $^{9}$Be & 710 & 881$^{a}$ & 912(23) \\
649: & $^{9}$Be & 710 & 920$^{b}$ & \\
650: & $^{12}$C & 670 & 939 & 915(13) \\
651: & $^{12}$C & 710 & 945 & 922(49) \\
652: \end{tabular}
653: \end{ruledtabular}
654: \\$^{a}$ obtained with $a=1.694$ fm ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
655: \\$^{b}$ obtained with $a=1.791$ fm ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
656: \end{table}
657:
658: In Table \ref{Tab2}, the values of the $^{15}$O
659: interaction cross section (\ref{IntSec})
660: obtained in the $^{12}$C and $^9$Be
661: targets with the fitted density parameters are compared
662: to the experimental data. One can see
663: a good agreement with the experimental data \cite{Oza01}.
664:
665: %%%%%%%% figure 3a %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
666: \begin{figure}
667: \includegraphics{Fig3}% Here is how to import EPS art
668: \caption{\label{Fig3} The energy dependence of the $p$+$^{14}$N
669: and $^{14}$N+$^{12}$C interaction cross sections, $\sigma_I$. Dots
670: in a) and b) are the experimental data \cite{Bar93,NNDC} and
671: \cite{Oza01,Fan00}, respectively. The calculations with the NN
672: interaction potential and the optical potential (OMP) are shown by
673: solid and dashed lines, respectively.}
674: \end{figure}
675: %%%%%%%% figure 3a %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
676:
677: %In our calculations of the reaction at the energy 56 A MeV
678: %in the Be target we use the NN interaction potential.
679:
680: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
681: \section{Results and discussion \label{secIV}}
682:
683: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Table 3 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
684: \begin{table}[tbp]
685: \caption{\label{Tab3} The single-particle one-proton removal cross
686: section ($\sigma_{-p}^{sp}$) and the one-proton removal cross
687: section ($\sigma_{-p}$) from $^{15}$O calculated at the energy 56
688: A MeV on a Be target.}
689: \begin{ruledtabular}
690: \begin{tabular}{cccc}
691: %Proc. & $\sigma_N$ & $\sigma_{-p}$ & $\sigma_O$ & FWHM \\
692: % & (mb) & (mb) & (mb) & (NeV/c) \\ \hline
693: %$1p_{1/2}$, N(1$^+$) & 1061 & 19.21 & 1080 & 184.8 \\ % 185.314
694: %$1p_{3/2}$, N(1$^+$) & 1061 & 15.22 & 1076 & 205.8 \\ % 203.366
695: %$1p_{3/2}$, N(2$^+$) & 1061 & 13.34 & 1074 & 218.7 \\ \hline % 214.341
696: %Total & & 54.00 & & 196.6 \\ %\hline % app 199
697: $^{14}$N $(J^{\pi},T)$ & $\sigma_{-p}^{sp}$ & $\sigma_{-p}$ & FWHM \\
698: & (mb) & (mb) & (MeV/c) \\ \hline
699: $(1^+,0)$ & 29.7 & 43.3 & 178 \\ % 185.314
700: $(0^+,1)$ & 25.9 & 10.8 & 191 \\ %
701: $(1^+,0)$ & 23.3 & 16.2 & 198 \\ % 203.366
702: $(2^+,0)$ & 20.4 & 25.6 & 209 \\ \hline % 214.341
703: Total & & 95.9 & 191 \\ %\hline % app 199
704: \end{tabular}
705: \end{ruledtabular}
706: \end{table}
707:
708: %-------------------------------------------------------------
709: %a=1.791
710: %$1p_{1/2}$, N(1$^+$) & 1111 & 20.52 & 1132 & 187.1 \\ % 185.314
711: %$1p_{3/2}$, N(1$^+$) & 1111 & 16.46 & 1128 & 208.6 \\ % 203.366
712: %$1p_{3/2}$, N(2$^+$) & 1111 & 14.54 & 1126 & 221.8 \\ \hline % 214.341
713: %Total & & 58.17 & & 199.4 \\ \hline % app 199
714: %---------------------------------------------------------------
715: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
716:
717: The $^{14}$N and $^{15}$O interaction cross sections obtained at
718: the energy 56 A MeV on a Be target are $\sigma_I(^{14}N)=1061$ mb
719: and $\sigma_I(^{15}O)=1091$ mb, respectively.
720:
721: One-proton removal cross sections from $^{15}$O
722: %, the $^{15}$O interaction cross
723: %section,
724: and the corresponding FWHM values of the LM distribution of the
725: $^{14}$N fragments obtained at the energy 56 A MeV for a Be
726: target, are listed in Table \ref{Tab3}. All the values are
727: calculated with the Be target density parameter $a=1.69$ fm. The
728: single particle proton removal cross sections, $\sigma_{-p}^{sp}$,
729: and those multiplied by the corresponding spectroscopic factors \cite{Coh67},
730: $\sigma_{-p}$, are given for each single particle state.
731: %These cross sections,
732: %$\sigma_{-p}^{sp}$, are given in Table \ref{Tab3} for each single
733: %particle state with no regard for the spectroscopic factors. The
734: %proton removal cross sections multiplied by the spectroscopic
735: %factors, $\sigma_{-p}$, are also presented in the Table.
736:
737: The total value of the one-proton removal cross section and the LM
738: distribution (last row of Table \ref{Tab3}) are found as the sum
739: of the proton removal cross sections $\sigma_{-p}$ and the
740: corresponding LM distributions.
741:
742: %%%%%%%% figure 5 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
743: \begin{figure}
744: \includegraphics{Fig6}% Here is how to import EPS art
745: \caption{\label{Fig5} Total longitudinal momentum distribution of
746: the $^{14}$N fragments (solid line) from the $^{15}$O break-up on
747: Be target at the energy 56 A MeV. Dots are the experimental data
748: \cite{Jep04}. Dashed line shows the longitudinal momentum
749: distribution of the $^{14}$N in the ground state. }
750: \end{figure}
751: %%%%%%%% figure 5 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
752:
753: The calculated values of the total proton-removal cross section
754: and the FWHM (Table \ref{Tab3}) obtained with the Be target
755: density parameter $a=1.69$ fm and the spectroscopic factors
756: \cite{Coh67} are in a very good agreement with the experimental
757: values $80 \pm 20$ mb and $190 \pm 10$ MeV/c \cite{Jep04}. With
758: the spectroscopic factors from \cite{Sah89} the value of the
759: proton removal cross section is 92.0 mb. With larger target
760: density parameter $a=1.79$ fm we get a larger values of the cross
761: sections. In this case, the total proton removal cross section
762: obtained with the spectroscopic factors \cite{Coh67} is
763: $\sigma_{-p}=100.2$ mb. So one can see that the total one proton
764: removal cross section is not very sensitive to small variations of
765: spectroscopic factors or target density parameter.
766: %Using the $^{15}$O interaction cross section one can
767: %estimate the rms matter radius. Thus, in the harmonic
768: %oscillator model (\ref{denHO}) the $^{15}$O rms radius is
769: %2.518 fm, obtained with the corresponding parameter
770: %$a=1.709$ fm in (\ref{denHO}) for the $^{14}$N rms
771: %radius 2.556 fm. In the case of the $^{14}$N rms
772: %radius 2.404 fm, the $^{15}$O rms radius is
773: %2.418 fm and $a=1.709$ fm.
774:
775: In Figure \ref{Fig5} the calculated LM distributions are compared
776: to the experimental one \cite{Jep04}. Note, that the theoretical
777: curves are shifted by 10 MeV/c to the left to be compared to the
778: experimental data.
779:
780: The solid line in the figure shows the total LM distribution
781: obtained with all $^{14}$N states shown in Table \ref{Tab3}.
782: %the regard for the two lowest $^{14}$N excited states. The
783: The dashed line represents the LM distribution from
784: %of the $p_{1/2}$
785: proton removal leading to $^{14}$N in the ground state. As it
786: corresponds to the smaller proton separation energy (Table
787: \ref{Tab2}), the LM distribution is narrower, than that for other
788: $^{14}$N states. Thus, the FWHM value of the total LM distribution
789: is larger than that for the $^{14}$N ground state by 13 MeV/c.
790:
791: The consideration of the $^{14}$N production in the excited states
792: does not change significantly the LM distribution because each
793: $^{14}$N state (including the ground state) is characterized by
794: relatively high proton separation energy, and, hence, has nearly
795: the same (Table \ref{Tab3}) LM distributions. Thus, the value of
796: FWHM is weakly sensitive to the weights of the $^{14}$N states and
797: the $^{14}$N excitation. However, these contributions are
798: essential in the calculations of the proton removal cross section.
799:
800:
801: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
802: \section{Conclusion \label{secV}}
803: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
804:
805: In this paper, we present calculations of the one-proton removal
806: cross sections from
807: $^{15}$O on a Be target at the energy 56 A
808: MeV. The proton removal cross sections, the $^{15}$O interaction
809: cross section, and the longitudinal momentum distribution of the
810: $^{14}$N fragments are obtained in the eikonal approximation of
811: the Glauber model with the NN interaction potential. In the
812: calculations, the production of the $^{14}$N core fragment in the
813: ground and excited states is regarded. The calculated FWHM=191
814: MeV/c of the total LM distribution is very close to the
815: experimentally measured value of $190 \pm 10$ MeV/c \cite{Jep04}.
816:
817: The calculated value, 95.9 mb, of the total one-proton removal
818: cross section is also very close to the experimental value $80 \pm
819: 20$ mb \cite{Jep04}. The break-up cross section is about 11\% of
820: the $^{15}$O interaction cross section.
821:
822: Returning to the $^{17}$Ne problem, we see that the contribution
823: of the proton removal from the $^{15}$O core might be essential.
824: In particular, at the energy 66 A MeV (see experimental data
825: \cite{kan03}), we get the cross section of the proton removal from
826: the core fragment 94.4 mb. Due to the weakly-bound protons
827: blocking the $^{15}$O core in $^{17}$Ne, this cross section is
828: reduced, contributing about 51 mb to the total one-proton removal
829: cross section. The contribution of the valence proton removal in
830: $^{17}$Ne with the spectacular $^{15}$O core is about 110 mb
831: \cite{Gri05}. Thus, the calculated total proton removal cross
832: section will be 161 mb. This value satisfies the experimental one,
833: $168\pm 17$ mb \cite{kan03}. Note, that the contribution of the
834: proton removal from the $^{15}$O core affects also the width of
835: the total $^{15}$O LM distribution.
836:
837: As a result, in the reactions with $^{17}$Ne, the proton removal
838: cross section measured at the energy 66 A MeV on a Be target
839: \cite{kan03} is relatively large compared to the cluster model
840: ($^{15}$O$+p+p$) predictions \cite{Gri05} and the measured
841: $^{15}$O LM distribution is wider than calculated one.
842:
843: Therefore, the proton removal from the core should necessarily be
844: taken into account in calculations
845: of the $^{17}$Ne fragmentation.
846:
847: %The good agreement of the cross sections and LM distributions
848: %with the experimental data shows that the used approach
849: %%with the parameters fitted from the nucleon-nucleus and
850: %%nucleus-nucleus interaction cross sections
851: %can be applied for calculations at higher energies for
852: %close nuclei.
853:
854: %In particular,
855: %these approach can be applied to studies of the weakly bound $^{17}$Ne
856: %nucleus, which is a candidate to the two-proton halo nucleus.
857: %This nucleus can be considered as the $^{15}$O$+2p$ clustered
858: %system (see, {Gri05}). The present calculations show, that
859: %the $^{15}$O core
860: %fragmentation can significantly contribute to the proton removal
861: %and, hence, should be taken into account.
862:
863:
864: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
865: %\newpage %Just because of unusual number of tables stacked at end
866: %\bibliography{apssamp}% Produces the bibliography via BibTeX.
867: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
868: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
869:
870: \bibitem{zhu95} M.V. Zhukov and I.J. Thompson, Phys. Rev. C {\bf 52}, 3505 (1995).
871:
872: \bibitem{kan03}
873: R.\ Kanungo, M. Chiba, S. Adhikari \textit{et al.}, Phys.\ Lett.\
874: \textbf{B571}, 21 (2003); R.\ Kanungo, Nucl.\ Phys.\
875: \textbf{A738}, 293 (2004).
876:
877: \bibitem{Gri05}L. V. Grigorenko, Yu. L. Parfenova, M.V. Zhukov,
878: Phys. Rev. C \textbf{71}, 051604R (2005).
879:
880: \bibitem{Jep04} H. Jeppesen, R. Kanungo, B. Abu-Ibrahim
881: {\it et al}, Nucl. Phys. {\bf A 739}, 57 (2004).
882:
883: \bibitem{Hen96}
884: K. Hencken, George Bertsch, H. Esbensen
885: Phys. Rev. C {\bf 54}, 3043 (1996).
886:
887: \bibitem{Esbens1}
888: H.~Esbensen, G. F. Bertch,
889: Phys. Rev. C {\bf 59}, 3240 (1999).
890:
891: \bibitem{Esb00}
892: H. Esbensen and K. Hencken, Phys. Rev. C {\bf 61}, 054606 (2000).
893:
894: \bibitem{Par00} Yu. L. Parfenova, M. V. Zhukov, and J. S. Vaagen,
895: Phys. Rev. C \textbf{62}, 044602 (2000).
896:
897: \bibitem{Sne69} J. L. Snelgrove and E. Kashy,
898: Phys. Rev. {\bf 187}, 1259 (1969).
899:
900: \bibitem{Coh67} S. Cohen and D. Kurath,
901: Nucl. Phys. {\bf A101}, 1 (1967).
902:
903: \bibitem{Bom71} J. Bommer, H. Fuchs, K. Grabisch, U. Janetzki and G. Roschert
904: Nucl. Phys. {\bf A172}, 618 (1971).
905:
906: \bibitem{Sah89} S. K. Saha, W. W. Daehnick, S. A. Dytman, {\it et al.}
907: %P. C. Li,
908: %J. G. Hardie, G. P. A. Berg, C. C. Foster, W. P. Jones, D. W. Miller,
909: %and E. J. Stephenson,
910: Phys. Rev. C {\bf 40}, 39 (1989).
911:
912: \bibitem{Neg99} F. Negoita, C. Borcea, F. Carstoiu {\it et al.},
913: %M. Lewitowicz,
914: %M. G. Saint-Laurent, R. Anne, D. Guillemaud-Mueller, A. C. Mueller,
915: %F. Pougheon, O. Sorlin, A. Fomitchev, S. Lukyanov, Yu. Penionzhkevich,
916: %N. Skobelev, Z. Dlouhy,
917: Phys. Rev. C {\bf 59} 2082 (1999).
918:
919: \bibitem{OP1} R. L. Varner, W. J. Thompson, T. L. Mcabee, E. J. Ludwig, T.
920: B. Clegg, Phys. Rep. {\bf 201}, 57 (1991).
921:
922: \bibitem{NN1} S. K. Charagi, S. K. Gupta, Phys. Rev. C~{\bf 41}~(1990)~1610.
923:
924: \bibitem{NN2} L. Ray, Phys. Rev. C {\bf 20}, 1857 (1979).
925:
926: \bibitem{Par02} Yu. L. Parfenova and M. V. Zhukov,
927: Phys. Rev. C \textbf{66}, 064607 (2002).
928:
929: \bibitem{deV87} H. de Vries, C. W. de Jager, and C. de Vries,
930: At. Data and Nucl. Data Tables \textbf{36}, 495 (1987).
931:
932: \bibitem{Oza01} A.Ozawa, T. Suzuki, and I. Tanihata, Nucl. Phys.
933: {\bf A693}, 32 (2001).
934:
935: \bibitem{Sah86} C. -C. Sahm, T. Murakami, J. G. Cramer,
936: A. J. Lazzarini, D. D. Leach, and D. R. Tieger Phys. Rev. C {\bf
937: 34}, 2165 (1986).
938:
939: \bibitem{She89} W.-Q. Shen {\it et al}, Nucl. Phys.
940: {\bf A491}, 130 (1989).
941:
942: \bibitem{Wei03} Y.-B. Wei, X.-Z. Cai, W.-Q. Shen {\it et al},
943: Chin. Phys. Lett. {\bf 20} (2003) 354.
944:
945: \bibitem{Tan85} I. Tanihata. Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 55} (1985) 2677.
946:
947: \bibitem{Kox85} S. Kox, A. Gamp, C. Perrin {\it et al}.,
948: Phys. Lett. {\bf B159} (1985) 15.
949:
950: \bibitem{Kox87} S. Kox, A. Gamp, C. Perrin {\it et al}.,
951: Phys. Rev. C {\bf 35} (1987) 1781.
952:
953: \bibitem{Jar87} J. Jaros, A. Wagner, L. Anderson, {\it et al.}
954: %O. Chamberlain, R. Z.
955: %Fuzesy, J. Gallup, W. Gorn, L. Schroeder, S. Shannon, G. Shapiro, H.
956: %Steiner,
957: Phys. Rev. C \textbf{18}, 2273 (1978).
958:
959: \bibitem{Tan90} I. Tanihata {\it et al}., Radioactive nuclear
960: beams, eds. W.D. Meyers, J.M. Nischke and E.B. Norman, p.249
961: (World Scientific, 1990).
962:
963: \bibitem{Bar93} V. S. Barashenkov in {\it "Secheniya vzaimodeistviya
964: chastits i yader s yadrami"}, JINR, Dubna, 1993.
965:
966: \bibitem{NNDC} National Nuclear Data Center http://nndc.bnl.gov
967: (NNDC), Brookhaven National Laboratory, Experimental Nuclear
968: Reaction Data (EXFOR / CSISRS)
969:
970: \bibitem{Fan00}
971: D. Q. Fang, W. Q. Shen, J. Feng, {\it et al.}
972: %X. Z. Cai, J. S. Wang, Q. M. Su,
973: %H. Y. Zhang, P. Y. Hu, Y. G. Ma, Y. T. Zhu,
974: %S. L. Li, H. Y. Wu, Q. B. Gou, G. M. Jin, W. L. Zhan, Z. Y. Guo,
975: %and G. Q. Xiao,
976: Phys. Rev. C {\bf 61}, 064311 (2000).
977:
978: \bibitem{War05} R. E. Warner, F. Carstoiu, J. A. Brown, {\it et al.}
979: %F. D. Becchetti, B. Davids, A. Galonsky, M. Horoi, J. J.
980: %Kolata, A. Nadasen, D. A. Roberts, R. M. Ronningen, C.
981: %Samanta, J. Schwarzenberg, M. Steiner, K. Subotic,
982: arXiv:nucl-ex/0507025
983:
984:
985:
986:
987: %\bibitem{Kan03} R. Kanungo, M.Chiba, S. Adhikari, {\it et al.}
988: %Phys. Lett. B {\bf 571} (2003) 21.
989:
990:
991: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
992:
993: %\bibitem{Mor87} R. Moreh and W. C. Sellyey,
994: %Phys. Lett. B {\bf 185}, 11 (1987).
995:
996: %\bibitem{Aum00} T. Aumann, A. Navin, D. P. Balamuth,
997: %D. Bazin, B. Blank B,
998: %B. A. Brown, J. E. Bush, J. A. Caggiano, B. Davids, T. Glasmacher,
999: %V. Guimaraes, P. G. Hansen, R. W. Ibbotson, D. Karnes, J. J. Kolata,
1000: %V. Maddalena, B. Pritychenko, H. Scheit, B. M. Sherrill, J. A. Tostevin,
1001: %Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 84} 35 (2000).
1002:
1003: %\bibitem{Wad97} M. Wada, K. Okada, H. Wang, K. Enders, F. Kurth,
1004: %T. Nakamura, S. Fujitaka, J. Tanaka, H. Kawakami, S. Ohtani, and
1005: %I. Katayama, Nucl.Phys. \textbf{A626}, 365c (1997).
1006:
1007: %\bibitem{Iso93} ISOLDE Collaboration,
1008: %H. T. Duong, C. Ekstrom, M. Gustafsson, T. T. Inamura, P. Juncar,
1009: %P. Lievens, I. Lindgren, S. Matsuki, T. Murayama, R. Neugart,
1010: %T. Nilsson, T. Nomura, M. Pellarin, S. Penselin, J. Persson,
1011: %J. Pinard, I. Ragnarsson, O. Redi, H. H. Stroke, and J. L. Vialle,
1012: %Nucl. Instr. and Methods in Phys. Research, Sect. A \textbf{325},
1013: %465 (1993).
1014:
1015: %\bibitem{Web76} E. W. Weber and J. Vetter, Phys. Lett. \textbf{56A},
1016: %446 (1976).
1017:
1018: %\bibitem{Ita83} W. M. Itano, Phys. Rev. B \textbf{27}, 1906 (1983).
1019:
1020: %\bibitem{Gei99}
1021: %W. Geithner, S. Kappertz, M. Keim, P. Lievens, R. Neugart,
1022: %L. Vermeeren, S. Wilbert, V. N. Fedoseyev, U. Koster, V. I. Mishin,
1023: %V. Sebastian, and ISOLDE Collaboration,
1024: %Phys. Rev. Lett. \textbf{83}, 3792 (1999).
1025:
1026: %\bibitem{Fuj99} T. Fujita, K. Ito, and T. Suzuki, Phys. Rev. C
1027: %{\bf 59}, 210 (1999).
1028:
1029: %\bibitem{For99} S. Fortier, S. Pita, J.S. Winfield, W. N. Catford,
1030: %N. A. Orr, J. Van de Wiele, Y. Blumenfeld, R. Chapman, S. Chappell,
1031: %N. M. Clarke, N. Curtis, M. Freer, S. Gales, K. L. Jones,
1032: %H. Langevin-Joliot, H. Laurent, I. Lhenry, J. M. Maison, P. Roussel-Chomaz,
1033: %M. Shawcross, M. Smith, K. Spohr, T. Suomijarvi, and A. de Vismes,
1034: %Phys. Lett. \textbf{461B}, 22 (1999).
1035:
1036: %\bibitem{Des02} P. Descouvemont, Nucl. Phys. \textbf{A699}, 463 (2002).
1037: %
1038: %\bibitem{War92} E. K. Warburton and B.A. Brown, Phys. Rev. C {\bf 46},
1039: %923 (1992).
1040:
1041: %\bibitem{Nun96} F. M. Nunes, J. A. Christley, I. J. Thompson, R. C.
1042: %Johnson, and V. D. Efros, Nucl. Phys. {\bf A609}, 43 (1996).
1043:
1044: %\bibitem{Aut70} D. L. Auton, R. G. H. Robertson, Nucl. Phys.{\bf A157},
1045: %305 (1970).
1046:
1047: %\bibitem{Aum00} T. Aumann, A. Navin, D. P. Balamuth, D. Bazin, B. Blank,
1048: %B. A. Brown, J. E. Bush, J. A. Caggiano, B. Davids, T. Glasmacher,
1049: %V. Guimaraes, P. G. Hansen, R. W. Ibbotson, D. Karnes, J. J. Kolata,
1050: %V. Maddalena, B. Pritychenko, H. Scheit, B. M. Sherrill, and J. A. Tostevin,
1051: %Phys. Rev. Lett. \textbf{84}, 35 (2000).
1052:
1053: %\bibitem{Fed93} D.V. Fedorov, A.S. Jensen, and K. Riisager, Phys. Lett.
1054: %\textbf{312B}, 1 (1993).
1055:
1056: %\bibitem{Ros78} F. R\"{o}sel, H. M. Fries, K. Adler, and H. C. Pauli,
1057: %At. Data and Nucl. Data Tables \textbf{21}, 92 (1978).
1058:
1059: %\bibitem{Ros72} H.J. Rosenberg and H.H. Stroke, Phys. Rev. A \textbf{5},
1060: %1992 (1972).
1061:
1062: %\bibitem{Dav65} A.S. Davydov, "\textit{Quantum Mechanics}", Pergamon Press,
1063: %Oxford, London, Edinburg, New York, Paris, Frankfurt, 1965.
1064:
1065: %\bibitem{Ros61} M.E. Rose "\textit{Relativistic Electron Theory}", John
1066: %Wiley and Sons, New York, 1961.
1067:
1068: %\bibitem{Bel63} M. Le Bellac, Nucl. Phys. \textbf{40}, 645 (1963).
1069:
1070: %\bibitem{Suz95} T. Suzuki, T. Otsuka, and A. Muta, Phys. Lett.
1071: %\textbf{364B}, 69 (1995).
1072:
1073: %\bibitem{Ots93} T. Otsuka, N.Fukunishi, and H. Sagawa. Phys. Rev. Lett.
1074: %\textbf{70}, 1385 (1993).
1075:
1076: %\bibitem{Oza01} A. Ozawa \textit{et al.},
1077: %, O. Bochkarev, L. Chulkov, D. Cortina, H. Geissel,
1078: %M. Hellstr\"{o}m, M. Ivanov, R. Janik, K. Kimura, T. Kobayashi, \textit{et al,}
1079: %Nucl. Phys. \textbf{A691,} 599 (2001).
1080:
1081: %\bibitem{Boh50} A. Bohr and V.F. Weisskopf, Phys. Rev. \textbf{77},
1082: %94 (1950).
1083:
1084: %\bibitem{Yam00} N. Yamanaka, Hyperfine interactions \textbf{127}, 129
1085: %(2000).
1086:
1087: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1088:
1089: %\bibitem{Des03} P. Descouvemont and C. Daniel, Phys.~Rev.~\textbf{C67},
1090: %~044309 ~(2003).
1091:
1092: %\bibitem{Tan88} I. Tanihata \textit{et al.},
1093: %, T. Kobayashi, O Yamakawa, S. Shimoura, K. Ekuni, K. Sugimoto, N. Takahashi, T. Shimoda,
1094: %Phys. Lett. \textbf{B206,} 592
1095: %(1988).
1096:
1097: %\bibitem{Zhu93} M. V. Zhukov \textit{et al.},
1098: %, B. V. Danilin, D. V. Fedorov, J. M. Bang, I. J. Thompson, J. S. Vaagen,
1099: %Phys. Rep. \textbf{231}, 151 (1993).
1100:
1101: %\bibitem{Lia90} E. Liatard \textit{et al.}, Europhys. Lett.\textbf{13}, 401 (1990) .
1102: %\bibitem{XX76} PL A56 (1976) 446.
1103:
1104: %\bibitem{Fed96} D.V. Fedorov, A.A. Jensen, Phys. Lett. \textbf{B389}, 631
1105: %(1996) .
1106:
1107: %\bibitem{Cob98} A. Cobis, D.V. Fedorov, A.S. Jensen, Phys.~Rev.~\textbf{C58}%
1108: %, ~1403~(1998).
1109:
1110: %\bibitem{End95} K. Enders, O.Becker, L. Brand, J. Dembcszynski, G. Marx, G.
1111: %Revalde, P. B. Rao, and G. Werth, Phys.~Rev.~A~{\bf 52}~(1995)~4434.
1112:
1113: %\bibitem{Neu00} R. Neugart. Hyperfine Interactions {\bf 127} (2000) 101.
1114:
1115: %\bibitem{Aum00} T. Aumann, A. Navin, D. P. Balamuth {\it et al.},
1116: %D. Bazin, B. Blank B,
1117: %B. A. Brown, J. E. Bush, J. A. Caggiano, B. Davids, T. Glasmacher,
1118: %V. Guimaraes, P. G. Hansen, R. W. Ibbotson, D. Karnes, J. J. Kolata,
1119: %V. Maddalena, B. Pritychenko, H. Scheit, B. M. Sherrill, J. A. Tostevin,
1120: %Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 84} 35 (2000).
1121:
1122: %\bibitem{Boh94} A. Bohr and V.F. Weisskopf, Phys.~Rev.~{\bf 77}%
1123: %~(1950)~94.
1124:
1125: %\bibitem{Til02} D.R. Tilley, et al., Nucl.~Phys.~{\bf A708}~(2002)~3.
1126:
1127: %\bibitem{XX49} PR 75 (1949) 1769.
1128:
1129: %\bibitem{Zwi79} B. Zwieglinski, W. Beneson, R. G. H. Robertson, Nucl.
1130: %Phys.~{\bf A315}~(1979) 124.
1131:
1132: %\bibitem{Str61} H.H. Stroke, R.J. Blyn-Stoyle, V. Jaccarino, Phys.~Rev.~%
1133: %{\bf 123}~(1961)~1326.
1134:
1135: \end{thebibliography}
1136:
1137:
1138:
1139: \end{document}
1140: %
1141: % ****** End of file apssamp.tex ******