1: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
2: %% Trim Size: 9.75in x 6.5in
3: %% Text Area: 8in (include Runningheads) x 5in
4: %% ws-ijmpe.tex : 8 April 2003
5: %% Tex file to use with ws-ijmpe.cls written in Latex2E.
6: %% The content, structure, format and layout of this style file is the
7: %% property of World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd.
8: %% Copyright 1995, 2002 by World Scientific Publishing Co.
9: %% All rights are reserved.
10: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
11: %
12: \documentclass{ws-ijmpe}
13:
14: \begin{document}
15:
16: \markboth{Authors' Names}{Instructions for
17: Typing Manuscripts (Paper's Title)}
18:
19: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Publisher's Area please ignore %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
20: %
21: \catchline{}{}{}{}{}
22: %
23: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
24:
25: \title{High-spin structures as the probes of proton-neutron pairing}
26: %
27: %INSTRUCTIONS FOR TYPESETTING MANUSCRIPTS\\
28: %USING COMPUTER SOFTWARE\footnote{For the title, try not to
29: %use more than 3 lines. Typeset the title in 10 pt
30: %Times roman, uppercase and boldface.}
31: %}
32:
33: \author{A.\ V.\ Afanasjev}
34:
35: %\footnotesize FIRST AUTHOR\footnote{Typeset names in
36: %10~pt Times roman, uppercase. Use the footnote to indicate
37: %the present or permanent address of the author.}}
38:
39: \address{Department of Physics and Astronomy, Mississippi State
40: University, Mississippi State, P.O. Box 5167, MS 39762, USA}
41:
42: %
43: %University Department, University Name, Address\\
44: %City, State ZIP/Zone,
45: %Country\footnote{State completely without abbreviations, the
46: %affiliation and mailing address, including country. Typeset in 8~pt
47: %Times italic.}\\
48: %first\_author@university.edu}
49: %
50: %\author{SECOND AUTHOR}%
51:
52: %\address{Group, Laboratory, Address\\
53: %City, State ZIP/Zone, Country\\
54: %second\_author@group.com}
55:
56: \maketitle
57:
58: \begin{history}
59: \received{(received date)}
60: \revised{(revised date)}
61: %\accepted{(Day Month Year)}
62: %\comby{(xxxxxxxxxx)}
63: \end{history}
64:
65: \begin{abstract}
66: Rotating $N=Z$ nuclei in the mass $A=58-80$ region have been studied within the
67: framework of isovector mean field theory. Available data is well and systematically
68: described in the calculations. The present study supports the presence of strong
69: isovector $np$ pair field at low spin, which is, however, destroyed at high spin.
70: No clear evidence for the existence of the isoscalar $t=0$ $np$ pairing has been
71: found.
72: \end{abstract}
73:
74: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
75: \section{Introduction}
76: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
77:
78:
79: It is well known that in the nuclei away from the $N=Z$ line proton-proton
80: ($pp$) and neutron-neutron ($nn$) pairing dominate. In the $N\approx Z$ nuclei,
81: protons and neutrons occupy the same levels. Strong $np$ pair correlations are
82: expected because of large spatial overlap of their wave functions. These correlations
83: can be isoscalar and isovector. Figuring out their character and whether
84: they form a static pair condensate (an average field) in respective channel
85: has been a challenge since medium mass $N=Z$ nuclei have come into reach of
86: experiment.
87:
88: At present, the situation with the isovector $np$-pairing is most clarified. The
89: strength of the isovector $np$-pairing is well defined by the isospin symmetry
90: \cite{FS.99-NP}. A number of experimental observables such as binding energies of the
91: $T=0$ and $T=1$ states in even-even and odd-odd $N=Z$ nuclei \cite{MFC.00,V.00,Rb74},
92: the observation of only one even-spin $T=0$ band in $^{74}$Rb \cite{Rb74} instead of
93: two nearly degenerate bands expected in the case of no $t=1$ $np$-pairing
94: \footnote{The lower-case letter $t$
95: is used for the isospin of the pair-field in order to avoid the confusion with the total
96: isospin of the states denoted by $T$.} {\it clearly point on the
97: existence of pairing condensate in this channel}. The analysis of pairing
98: vibrations around $^{56}$Ni indicates a collective behavior of the isovector
99: pairing vibrations but does not support any appreciable collectivity in
100: the isoscalar channel \cite{bes-rev,MFCC.00}.
101:
102:
103: On the other hand, it is still {\it an issue of debate whether the isoscalar
104: $np-$pair correlations lead to a pairing condensate.} The calculations
105: with the realistic forces (Paris force, Argonne V14 force) indicate that the
106: isoscalar pairing gap in the symmetric nuclear matter is 3 times larger than the
107: isovector one \cite{GSMLSS.01}. The potential problem stems from the transition
108: from realistic to effective interaction: the extremely strong $t=0$ pairing emerges
109: essentially from the fact that with respect to the $t=1$ channel, dominated by
110: the central force, the tensor force is acting additionally. However, the medium
111: modification (screening) of the tensor force is still controversial subject
112: \cite{ZZ.91}. Thus, the addition of tensor component into isoscalar pairing
113: channel of the models based on effective forces may be necessary for a correct
114: description of $np$-pairing in this channel. In the existing mean-field models,
115: this component is neglected. An additional challenge lies in the fact that the
116: strength of the effective isoscalar $t=0$ $np$-pairing is not known, and thus
117: has to be defined by the comparison with experimental data. The quantity most
118: frequently used for that is Wigner energy \cite{SatW.97}, but it does not provide
119: a unique and reliable way to define this strength (see discussion in Ref.\
120: \cite{AF.05}).
121:
122:
123: In a given situation, two major questions arise, namely, {\bf (i)} {\it what
124: are the physical observables which are sensitive to isoscalar $np$-pair condensate}
125: and {\bf (ii)} {\it which theoretical framework has to be used for the description
126: of such systems?}
127:
128:
129: Isoscalar $np-$pairing may play a role in single-beta decay \cite{MBK.89,EPSVD.97}
130: (see, however, Refs.\ \cite{MPK.03,NMVPR.05}), double-beta decay \cite{PSVF.96,CHHR.99},
131: transfer reactions \cite{F.70,F.71} (see, however, Ref.\ \cite{GSW.04}), alpha decay
132: and alpha correlations \cite{RSSN.98,HK.00}. However, since no symmetry-unrestricted
133: mean-field (and beyond mean field) calculations of $np-$pairing, based on realistic
134: effective interaction and the isospin-conserving formalism, have been carried out so
135: far, no hard evidence for the elusive $t=0$ $np-$pairing phase has yet been found.
136: In addition, it was suggested that rotational properties (moments of inertia, band
137: crossing frequencies etc) can provide a signal for the
138: existence of isoscalar $np$-pair condensate \cite{SatW.97,KZ.98,SW.00,SatW.00,G.01}.
139: These properties will be in the focus of the present manuscript.
140:
141: In general case, the isovector and isoscalar $np-$pairing as well as isospin symmetry
142: conservation have to be taken into account in the $N\approx Z$ nuclei (see Ref.\ \cite{G.99}
143: and references quoted therein). On the mean field level, the symmetry breaking in the case
144: of $np-$pairing (especially of its isoscalar component because of the uncertainty with its
145: strength) and isospin \cite{DH.95} can be small. In such situation, the exact methods of
146: symmetry restoration by projection techniques have to be employed. Unfortunately, none of
147: available theoretical tools take into account these correlations and requirements
148: simultaneously reflecting the fact that such theories are extremely complicated. In
149: particular, the isospin symmetry restoration in the presence of the $np-$pairing has been
150: neglected in almost all theoretical studies of the $N\approx Z$ nuclei. It is reasonable
151: to expect that because of the complexity of the problem, no theoretical model, which will
152: fully take into account above mentioned requirements, will be available in
153: foreseeable future.
154:
155:
156: In such situation, isovector mean field theory \cite{FS.99-NP} is a reasonable
157: approximation for the study of rotational properties of the $N\approx Z$ nuclei, see
158: Sect.\ \ref{Is-mean}. The present manuscript is an extension of our earlier
159: systematic study of rotating $N\approx Z$ nuclei published in Ref.\ \cite{AF.05}.
160: Analysis of recent experimental data in $^{72}$Kr and $^{76}$Sr within the
161: isovector mean field theory, combined systematic results on the $N\approx Z$ nuclei
162: and the analysis of the expected situation in $^{64}$Ge will be presented in
163: Sects.\ \ref{Sect-Kr72}, \ref{Sect-Sr76}, \ref{Systematics} and \ref{Ge64-sect},
164: respectively. Section \ref{Summary} summarizes our main conclusions.
165:
166:
167: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
168: \section{Isovector mean field theory}
169: \label{Is-mean}
170: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
171:
172: The isovector mean-field theory \cite{FS.99-NP} is used for the study
173: of rotating properties of the $N\approx Z$ nuclei in the present
174: manuscript. This theory assumes that there is no isoscalar
175: $np-$pairing, but takes into account isovector $np-$pairing and
176: isospin symmetry conservation. The later feature, treated in strong
177: coupling limit, is a clear advantage
178: of this approach since it is ignored in other studies. An additional
179: advantage is the fact that standard mean field models with only $t=1$
180: like-particle pairing can be employed. The basis modification of these
181: theories lies in adding the isorotational energy term $T(T+1)/2{\cal J}_{iso}$
182: to the total energy. Since, however, all low-lying rotational bands in even-even
183: $N=Z$ nuclei have isospin $T=0$, this term vanishes. On the level of accuracy of the
184: standard mean-field calculations, the restoration of the isospin symmetry (which
185: takes care of the t=1 $np$ pair field) changes only the energy of the $T=1$ states
186: relative to the $T=0$ states \cite{FS.99-NP}. With this in mind, the rotating
187: properties were studied by means of the cranked Relativistic Hartree-Bogoliubov
188: \cite{A190,CRHB,VRAL.05} (CRHB) theory.
189:
190:
191:
192:
193:
194: At high spin, the impact of $t=1$ pairing is negligible and consequently it can be
195: neglected. In such situation, the isospin broken at low spin by isovector pairing is
196: conserved automatically \cite{G.99}. Thus, the high spin ($I\geq 15\hbar$) states are
197: systematically studied by means of the cranked Nilsson-Strutinsky (CNS)
198: \cite{Beng85,A110,PhysRep} and the cranked Relativistic Mean Field (CRMF)
199: \cite{KR.89,KR.93,A150} approaches, which assume zero pairing. The standard set of
200: Nilsson parameters \cite{Beng85} is used in the CNS calculations. The CRMF and CRHB
201: calculations have been performed with the NL3 parameterization of the RMF Lagrangian
202: \cite{NL3} which provides good description of nuclear properties throughout
203: nuclear chart. The D1S Gogny force \cite{D1S} and approximate particle number
204: projection by means of the Lipkin-Nogami (LN) method have been used in the pairing
205: channel of the CRHB theory.
206:
207: In the calculations without pairing, the shorthand notation $[p,n]$ indicating
208: the number $p(n)$ of occupied $g_{9/2}$ proton (neutron) orbitals is used for
209: labeling of the configurations. In the cases when the holes in the $f_{7/2}$ subshell
210: play a role, an extended shorthand notation $[(p_h)p,(n_h)n]$ with $p_h(n_h)$
211: being the number of proton (neutron) $f_{7/2}$ holes is used.
212: % Since high-$j$ $f_{7/2}$ holes are important mainly in nuclei
213: % around $^{60}$Zn \cite{A60}, in many cases
214: %we consider only mixed
215: % low-$j$ $N=3$ orbitals and
216: The $3_i$ label is used for mixed low-$j$ $N=3$ orbitals, where subscript
217: $i$ indicates the position of the orbital within the specific
218: signature group.
219:
220: In a number of publications it has been suggested that rotational properties
221: of the $N\approx Z$ nuclei can provide evidence for the presence of a $t=0$ $np$
222: pair field \cite{SatW.97,KZ.98,SW.00,SatW.00,G.01}. However, the reasoning often
223: ignored the considerable $\beta$- and $\gamma$-softness of the nuclei in the
224: mass region of interest \cite{SatW.97,KZ.98,SW.00}.
225: %
226: % In this section, we review
227: % the comparison of the data available at present with our calculations (Secs.\
228: % \ref{accuracy} and \ref{spec-nucl}), which assume a realistic (not only monopole)
229: % $t=1$ pair field and take the shape changes into account.
230: %
231: The question which physical observables of rotating nuclei may present evidence for
232: the existence of the $t=0$ $np$ pair field is addressed in the present manuscript.
233: The size of the moment of inertia, the frequencies at which the pairs of particles
234: align their angular momentum (band crossing frequencies), deformation properties, and
235: unexpected mixing of configurations with a different number of quasiparticles have
236: been discussed in the literature as possible indicators of $np$-pairing in rotating
237: $N\approx Z$ nuclei \cite{FS.99-NP,SatW.97,KZ.98,SW.00,SatW.00,G.01,73Kr,Br70}.
238:
239:
240:
241:
242:
243: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
244: \section{$^{72}$Kr nucleus}
245: \label{Sect-Kr72}
246: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
247:
248: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
249: \begin{figure}[th]
250: \centerline{\psfig{file=kr72-eld-b2b4-col.eps,width=8cm}}
251: \vspace*{8pt}
252: \caption{Excitation energies of the experimental bands
253: 2 and 4 in $^{72}$Kr and theoretical configurations calculated in the CRMF,
254: CRHB (panel (a)), and CNS (panel (b)) approaches relative to a rigid rotor
255: reference $E_{RLD}=E-0.02594 I(I+1)$. Experimental data are shown by symbols,
256: while lines are used for theoretical results. Open symbols are used for the
257: states observed recently in Refs.\ \protect\cite{Kr72a,Kr72b}. \label{E-b2-4}}
258: \end{figure}
259: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
260:
261:
262: In recent experiment \cite{Kr72a,Kr72b}, previously observed bands
263: were extended to an excitation energy of $\sim$24 MeV and angular momentum
264: of 30$\hbar$, new side band has been observed and the lifetimes of high-spin
265: states were measured for the first time. These data allow to check further
266: the accuracy of the description of rotating nuclei within the isovector mean
267: field theory. In particular, it allow to see if there is any enhancement
268: of the quadrupole deformation in the $N=Z$ nuclei. Ref.\ \cite{TWH.98}
269: predicted that the $t=0$ $np$-pairing generates such enhancement. An important
270: aspect of this study is the fact that all theoretical calculations (partially
271: published in Ref.\ \cite{AF.05}; see also Ref.\ \cite{Kr72-ing} for the results
272: of the CNS calculations employing different set of model parameters) were
273: performed before the data became available, and, thus they
274: can be considered as predictions.
275:
276:
277: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
278: \begin{figure}[th]
279: \centerline{\psfig{file=kr72-qt-col.eps,width=10cm}}
280: \vspace*{8pt}
281: \caption{Transition quadrupole moments as a function of angular momentum. The data
282: point at $I = 7\hbar$ is from Ref.\ \protect\cite{Giacomo}, while boxes represent
283: the measured transition quadrupole moments and their uncertainties within the
284: measured spin range from the present work. The results of the CRMF and CRHB
285: calculations are shown by solid and long-dashed lines, respectively.
286: \label{kr72-qt}}
287: \end{figure}
288: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
289:
290:
291:
292: Fig.\ \ref{E-b2-4} shows the experimental excitation energies minus a rigid
293: rotor reference versus angular momentum for bands 2 and 4 and the corresponding
294: theoretical configurations. In Ref.\ \cite{AF.05} band 4 was assigned to the
295: [2,2] configuration (i.\ e. the double S-band). This band (including recently
296: observed $I=28\hbar$ state) is well described by the CNS and CRMF calculations.
297: These calculations also indicate the presence
298: of two closely lying [3,3] configurations (Fig.\ \ref{E-b2-4}), which are the
299: candidates for the band 2. The configurations [3,3]a and [3,3]b are obtained
300: from the [2,2] configuration by exciting a proton and a neutron from
301: the $3_3 (\alpha=-1/2)$ and $3_3 (\alpha=+1/2)$ orbitals into second
302: $g_{9/2} (\alpha=+1/2)$ orbital, respectively.
303: The details of the interpretation of band 2 are, however, model dependent
304: reflecting the fact that the description of the energies of the single-particle
305: states is not optimal (see Refs.\ \cite{PhysRep,A250}). The CNS calculations
306: with the Nilsson parameters from Ref.\ \cite{GBI.86} ('A80' parameters) and the
307: CRMF calculations are similar and they suggest that the band 2 may be the envelope
308: of the [3,3]a and [3,3]b configurations (see top panel in Fig.\ \ref{E-b2-4}),
309: whereas the CNS calculations with the standard Nilsson parameters suggest the
310: [3,3]a configuration. In the former case the irregularities seen in $J^{(2)}$ of
311: the band B at $\omega \geq 0.8$ MeV (see Fig.\ 2 in Ref.\ \cite{Fisher}) may be
312: explained as due to the crossing (or interaction) of the [3,3]a and [3,3]b
313: configurations.
314:
315: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
316: \begin{figure}[th]
317: \centerline{\psfig{file=pairing-kr72-col.eps,width=12cm}}
318: \vspace*{8pt}
319: \caption{Calculated values of the pairing energies $E_{pairing}=-1/2 Tr(\Delta \kappa)$
320: and particle number fluctuations $<(\Delta N)^2>$ as a function of rotational frequency
321: $\Omega_X$ in the
322: CRHB configurations A and B shown in Fig.\ \ref{E-b2-4}. The notation of
323: the lines is given in the figure.
324: \label{Pairing}}
325: \end{figure}
326: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
327:
328:
329: However, a number of factors favor the assignment of the [3,3]a configuration
330: to the band 2. An analysis of the relative energies of experimental high-spin bands in
331: $^{73,74}$Kr and $^{70}$Br shows that they are better described in the CNS
332: calculations with the standard set of the Nilsson parameters as compared with the
333: ones employing
334: 'A80' parameters. The experimental $E-E_{RLD}$ plot at spin larger than $20\hbar$ is
335: better described by the [3,3]a configuration (see Fig.\ \ref{E-b2-4}). The transition
336: quadrupole moment $Q_t$ of the configuration [3,3]b is smaller than the one of the
337: [3,3]a configuration by 0.5-0.75 $e$b in the spin range of interest (see Fig.\ 11 in
338: Ref.\ \cite{AF.05}). While the [3,3]a configuration reproduces the observed values
339: of $Q_t$ of band 2 reasonably well (Fig.\ \ref{kr72-qt}), the same will not be
340: possible if the configuration [3,3]b is assigned to band 2.
341:
342:
343: The CRHB calculations were performed for the configurations A and B which
344: are the paired analogs of unpaired [2,2] and [3,3]a configurations (Fig.\ \ref{E-b2-4}).
345: Their energies are lower than those of their unpaired analogs by approximately 0.7 MeV.
346: The pairing correlations in these configurations are small (see Fig.\ \ref{Pairing})
347: and comparable with the ones in the SD band of $^{60}$Zn above the paired band crossing
348: \cite{Pingst-A30-60}. They decrease with increasing rotational frequency reflecting
349: the Coriolis anti-pairing effect. As a consequence of weak pairing correlations, the
350: results of the CRHB calculations are very close to the ones of CRMF for the physical
351: observables of interest such as $(E-E_{RLD})$ plots (Fig.\ \ref{E-b2-4}) (and, as a
352: result, kinematic and dynamic moments of inertia), and transition quadrupole
353: moments (Fig.\ \ref{kr72-qt}). It is, however, necessary to recognize that due to the
354: deficiences of the Lipkin-Nogami method in the regime of weak pairing \cite{SRR.02}
355: the CRMF calculations without pairing can be better approximation to exact solution
356: at medium and high spins than those within the CRHB+LN framework \cite{VRAL.05}.
357:
358: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
359: \begin{figure}[th]
360: \centerline{\psfig{file=side-band-col.eps,width=8cm}}
361: \vspace*{8pt}
362: \caption{ The same as Fig.\ \ref{E-b2-4}, but for the side band. Panel
363: (a) shows experimental bands, while the results of the CNS calculations
364: for their theoretical counterparts are given in panel (b). In addition,
365: the CRMF [2,3] configuration is shown in panel (b) by dash-dotted line.
366: \label{Side-band}}
367: \end{figure}
368: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
369:
370: Side band has been observed in Ref.\ \cite{Kr72a,Kr72b}. It is linked to the ground
371: state band by the 1685 and 1653 keV transitions of unknown multipolarity. If one assumes
372: E2 multipolarity for these transitions, then this band would have parity $\pi=+$ and
373: signature $r=0$. With this assignment, all observed high-spin bands would have the
374: same parity-signature contrary to theoretical results obtained in the CNS and CRMF
375: calculations which suggest the presence of near-yrast rotational sequences of negative
376: parity (see Fig.\ \ref{Side-band}). Thus, E1 multipolarity is more likely choice
377: for the multipolarities of these transitions. With this assignment, side band has
378: negative parity and extends from spin $7^-$ up to spin $29^-$. As follows from the
379: $E-E_{RLD}$ plot of this band, it is built from 3 configurations with configuration
380: changes (band crossings) taking place at $I=11\hbar$ and $I=17\hbar$. The high spin
381: branch, which starts at $I=17\hbar$, is well described by the [2,3] configuration
382: in the CNS and CRMF calculations (Fig.\ \ref{Side-band}). At high spin, the relative
383: energies of the band 4, side band and band 2 are well described in the CNS calculations
384: with the standard Nilsson parameters by the [2,2], [2,3] and [3,3] configurations
385: (see Fig.\ \ref{Side-band}). The calculations also suggest that low spin branch of
386: side band may be associated with oblate '[2,3]-obl' configuration (Fig.\ \ref{Side-band}).
387:
388:
389: Fig.\ \ref{kr72-qt} compares measured transition quadrupole moments of observed
390: bands with the ones of assigned configurations. Starting from the [2,2] configuration (band 4),
391: subsequent additions of the $g_{9/2}$ particle(s) increase the transition quadrupole
392: moment. This trend is seen both in calculations and in experiment. In addition, absolute
393: values of $Q_t$ are well described in the calculations. Experimental data
394: on transition quadrupole moments are also available for $^{73,74}$Kr \cite{Kr73Rb74-def,Kr74}
395: and $^{74}$Rb \cite{Kr73Rb74-def}. These data (both absolute values and relative
396: changes in $Q_t$) agree reasonably well with the results of the CNS, CRMF, and CRHB
397: calculations (see Refs.\ \cite{AF.05,Kr72b,Kr73Rb74-def,Kr74} for details). In
398: addition, available data on transition quadrupole moments of superdeformed rotational bands
399: in $^{59}$Cu \cite{Cu59} and $^{60}$Zn \cite{A60} are well reproduced in similar calculations.
400: Thus, one can conclude that {\it no enhancement of quadrupole deformation in the
401: $N=Z$ nuclei (which is expected in the presence of the $t=0$ $np$-pairing \cite{TWH.98}) as
402: compared with the one obtained within the framework of isovector mean field theory
403: is required in order to reproduce experiment.}
404:
405:
406: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
407:
408:
409:
410:
411: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
412: \section{$^{76}$Sr nucleus: probing Coulomb antipairing effect.}
413: \label{Sect-Sr76}
414: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
415:
416: The progress in understanding of $np$-pairing requires better knowledge
417: of different components of like-particle pairing. The investigation of
418: the impact of the Coulomb exchange term on the pairing field, within the
419: framework of the Hartree-Fock-Bogoliubov approach based on the Gogny force,
420: found a considerable decrease of the proton pairing energies due to a Coulomb
421: anti-pairing effect \cite{Gogny}. Recent experimental data on $^{76}$Sr
422: \cite{Sr76}, when combined with the limited results from previous high spin
423: studies of other $A=58-80$ $N=Z$ nuclei in which $g_{9/2}$ proton/ neutron
424: paired band crossings have been observed ($^{60}$Zn \cite{Zn60SD}, $^{68}$Se
425: \cite{fisch03}, $^{72}$Kr \cite{kel02}) provide us with the first real
426: opportunity to test these predictions \cite{Sr76}.
427:
428:
429: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
430: \begin{figure}[th]
431: \centerline{\psfig{file=Coulomb-col.eps,width=12cm}}
432: \vspace*{8pt}
433: \caption{Kinematic and dynamic moments of inertia of rotational bands in even-even
434: $N=Z$ nuclei. The dynamic moments of inertia (open triangles) are shown only for
435: $^{60}$Zn and $^{76}$Sr. The results of the CRHB calculations are shown by solid
436: and dash-dotted lines for kinematic and dynamic moments of inertia, respectively.
437: The kinematic moments of inertia obtained in the CRMF calculations are shown
438: by dashed lines in $^{68}$Se and $^{72}$Kr.
439: \label{Coulomb}}
440: \end{figure}
441: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
442:
443: %
444: % So far, this
445: % effect has not been investigated experimentally due to the difficulties
446: % of disentangling this phenomenon from other effects in the $N\neq Z$ systems. However,
447: % the even-even $N=Z$ systems provide an excellent laboratory to
448: % test this prediction. {\bf The results from the present work, when combined
449: % with the limited results from previous high spin studies of other N=Z nuclei in this
450: % region, provides us with the first real opportunity to test these predictions.}
451: %
452: The similarity of the proton and neutron single-particle
453: spectra (apart from some constant shift in absolute energies by the Coulomb energy)
454: in the $N=Z$ nuclei leads to the fact that proton and neutron pairing energies are almost the same
455: for proton and neutron subsystems in calculations which do not contain a Coulomb
456: exchange term (as is the case with CRHB calculations, see Fig.\ \ref{Pairing}).
457: As a consequence, the alignment (paired band crossing) of proton and neutron pairs
458: takes place at the same rotational frequency in such calculations (see Fig.\ \ref{Coulomb}),
459: which in turn leads to only one bump in the dynamic moment of inertia. However, if the
460: predictions of Ref.\ \cite{Gogny} are correct then the proton pairing energy should be
461: considerably smaller than that due to the neutrons, and it is reasonable to expect that this
462: fact will result in an alignment of proton and neutron pairs at different frequencies,
463: which would manifest itself in a double peaked shape for the dynamic moments of inertia.
464:
465:
466: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
467: \begin{figure}[th]
468: \centerline{\psfig{file=system-col.ps,width=12.7cm}}
469: \vspace*{8pt}
470: \caption{Alignments of rotational structures in the $N\approx Z$ nuclei
471: compared with the results of the CRMF and CRHB calculations. The figure
472: is based on the results published in Refs.\
473: \protect\cite{Rb74,AF.05,Br70,A60,Kr73,Cu59,Sr76}. The label 'CC' indicates
474: the configuration change within the configuration.
475: \label{syst}}
476: \end{figure}
477: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
478:
479:
480: Fig.\ \ref{Coulomb}
481: shows the kinematic moments of inertia for all four nuclei and the dynamic moments
482: of inertia for $^{60}$Zn and $^{76}$Sr. The ground and $I^{\pi}=2^+$ states of
483: $^{68}$Se and $^{72}$Kr are believed to be oblate (see Ref.\ \cite{AF.05})
484: which leads to low values for the kinematic moments of inertia at low frequencies
485: (see Fig.\ \ref{Coulomb}). With increasing spin highly-triaxial ($^{68}$Se) or near-prolate
486: ($^{72}$Kr) structures become yrast \cite{AF.05}. Thus, the first irregularity seen in
487: the kinematic moments of inertia of these nuclei at a rotational frequency
488: $\hbar\omega \sim 0.4$ MeV is due to this shape coexistence. However such shape
489: coexistence is not present in $^{60}$Zn and $^{76}$Sr at low spin. These nuclei are
490: characterized by gradually increasing kinematic moments of inertia at low rotational
491: frequency (see Fig.\ \ref{Coulomb}). In $^{68}$Se the band crossing seen at
492: $\hbar\omega \sim 0.7$ MeV is not related to the standard change from the ground ($g-$)
493: band to the $g_{9/2}$ aligned proton/ neutron $S-$band \cite{AF.05}, and, thus,
494: can be excluded from consideration. It is clear, however, that for the other three
495: nuclei the proton and neutron $g_{9/2}$ paired band crossings take place
496: simultaneously at $\hbar\omega$ = 0.6 -- 1.0 MeV. As a result, the currently
497: available experimental data in even-even $N=Z$ nuclei {\it do not support the
498: existence of the Coulomb anti-pairing effect caused by the Coulomb exchange term.}
499: These data are also well described in the CRHB and CRMF (above paired band crossing)
500: calculations (see Fig.\ \ref{Coulomb} and Refs.\ \cite{AF.05,Sr76,Pingst-A30-60}
501: for details).
502:
503:
504: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
505: \section{Systematics of rotational and deformation properties}
506: \label{Systematics}
507: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
508:
509: The experimental data on alignments in rotational structures of
510: the $N\approx Z$ nuclei are compared with the results of the CRMF
511: and CRHB calculations in Fig.\ \ref{syst}. One can see good
512: agreement between experiment and the CRMF calculations at high spin
513: as well as between experiment and CRHB calculations at low spin.
514: In addition, experimental data on transition quadrupole moments are
515: available for $^{59}$Cu \cite{Cu59}, $^{60}$Zn \cite{A60}, $^{72,73,74}$Kr
516: \cite{Kr72a,Kr72b,Kr73Rb74-def,Kr74} and $^{74}$Rb \cite{Kr73Rb74-def}.
517: These data agree well with the results of the CNS, CRMF, and
518: CRHB calculations (see Sect.\ \ref{Sect-Kr72} in the present manuscript and
519: Refs.\ \cite{AF.05,Kr72b,A60,Cu59,Kr73Rb74-def,Kr74} for details).
520:
521:
522: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
523: \begin{figure}[th]
524: \centerline{\psfig{file=ge64-eld-col.eps,width=8cm}}
525: \vspace*{8pt}
526: \caption{Excitation energies of the configurations forming the yrast
527: lines of 4 combinations of parity and signature in $^{64}$Ge given
528: relative to a rigid rotor reference $E_{RLD}=0.03157 I(I+1)$ MeV.
529: Calculated terminating (aligned) states are encircled. The shorthand
530: notation $<p_1p_2,n_1n_2>$ indicates the number $p_1(n_1)$ of occupied
531: $g_{9/2}$ proton (neutron) orbitals and the number $p_2(n_2)$ of occupied
532: $h_{11/2}$ proton (neutron) orbitals. $p_2(n_2)$ are omitted
533: when later orbitals are not occupied. Wide line indicate the total
534: yrast line. The same type of symbols is used for signature partner
535: orbitals. Solid (open) symbols are used for $\alpha=0 (1)$
536: configurations. \label{Ge64-eld}}
537: \end{figure}
538: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
539:
540:
541:
542: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
543: \section{$^{64}$Ge nucleus}
544: \label{Ge64-sect}
545: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
546:
547: As follows from Fig.\ \ref{syst}, the knowledge of the $N=Z$ $^{62}$Ga,
548: $^{64}$Ge, $^{66}$As, and $^{78}$Yb nuclei is restricted to low-spin states.
549: The CNS calculations for $^{64}$Ge are performed in order to better
550: understand what can be expected at high spin in these nuclei.
551:
552: It has been pointed out before that $^{64}$Ge nucleus is soft with respect to
553: $\gamma-$ and octupole deformations (see Ref.\ \cite{Ge64-exp} and references
554: quoted therein). Fig.\ \ref{Ge64-eld} shows the results of the CNS calculations
555: (which are restricted to reflection symmetric shapes), which also indicate softness
556: toward $\gamma$-deformation. Indeed, the
557: [0,0]$(\alpha=0)$ configuration is characterized by the $(\varepsilon_2 \sim 0.2,
558: \gamma \sim -30^{\circ})$ deformation in the spin range $I=2-8\hbar$. The yrast
559: lines of other combinations of parity and signature are characterized by similar
560: deformation in the spin range $I=0-3\hbar$. Up to spins $I\sim 35\hbar$, the
561: yrast lines are dominated by the states with the deformations $\varepsilon_2
562: \approx 0.25-0.35$ and $\gamma=26^{\circ}-60^{\circ}$. The terminating bands,
563: many of which terminate in a favored way \cite{PhysRep}, dominate the yrast
564: region up to $I\sim 35\hbar$. Superdeformed bands with deformation
565: $\varepsilon_2 \sim 0.5, \gamma \sim 10^{\circ}$ become yrast above that spin.
566:
567: It seems that the complicated structure of this nucleus, dominated in the
568: spin region of interest by $\gamma-$ (and probably octupole) softness and terminating
569: structures [which are not that different from the ones in $^{68}$Se (see Fig.\ 7
570: in Ref.\ \cite{AF.05}) and in $^{74}$Kr (see Fig.\ 3 in \cite{AF.05})], will not
571: allow to obtain reliable evidences of the isoscalar $t=0$ $np-$pairing even if
572: the experimental data will be extended to higher spin.
573:
574:
575: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
576: \section{Conclusions}
577: \label{Summary}
578: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
579:
580: The systematic analysis of the rotational response and deformation
581: properties of the $N\approx Z$ nuclei support the interpretation of
582: these nuclei within the isovector mean field theory. According to this
583: framework, there is no isoscalar $np$ pair field. At low spin, strong
584: isovector pair field exists, which includes a large $np$ component, the
585: strength of which is determined by isospin conservation. Like in nuclei
586: away from the $N=Z$ line, this isovector
587: pair field is destroyed by rotation. In this high spin regime the calculations
588: without pairing describe well the data provided the drastic shape changes
589: that cause among other things band termination are taken into account. No clear
590: evidence for the existence of the isoscalar $t=0$ $np$ pairing has been found.
591: However, due to limitations of our theoretical tools one cannot completely
592: exclude the possibility of the existence of $np$ pairing condensate
593: in the $t=0$ channel or the possibility that the rotational properties
594: are not sensitive to this type of pairing.
595:
596:
597:
598: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
599: \section*{Acknowledgements}
600: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
601:
602: The work was supported by the DOE grant DE-FG02-07ER41459. I would like to
603: express my gratitude to S.\ Frauendorf, R.\ Wadsworth, and C.\ Andreoiu for
604: their contributions to this project.
605:
606: \begin{thebibliography}{0}
607:
608: \bibitem{FS.99-NP} S.\ G.\ Frauendorf and J.\ A.\ Sheikh, {\it Nucl.\ Phys.} {\bf A645}, 509 (1999).
609:
610: \bibitem{MFC.00} A.\ O.\ Macchiavelli, P.\ Fallon, R.\ M.\ Clark, M.\ Cromaz,
611: M.\ A.\ Deleplanque, R.\ M.\ Diamond, G.\ J.\ Lane, I.\ Y.\ Lee, F.\ S.\ Stephens,
612: C.\ E.\ Svensson, K.\ Vetter, and D.\ Ward, {\it Phys.\ Rev.} {\bf C61}, 041303(R)
613: (2000).
614:
615: \bibitem{V.00} P.\ Vogel, {\it Nucl.\ Phys.} {\bf A662}, 148 (2000).
616:
617: \bibitem{Rb74} C.\ D.\ O'Leary, C.\ E.\ Svensson, S.\ G.\ Frauendorf,
618: A.\ V.\ Afanasjev, D.\ E.\ Appelbe, R.\ A.\ E.\ Austin,
619: G.\ C.\ Ball, J.\ A.\ Cameron, R.\ M.\ Clark, M.\ Cromaz,
620: P.\ Fallon, D.\ F.\ Hodgson, N.\ S.\ Kelsall, A.\ O.\
621: Macchiavelli, I.\ Ragnarsson, D.\ Sarantites, J.\ C.\
622: Waddington and R.\ Wadsworth, {\it Phys.\ Rev.} {\bf C67}, 021301(R) (2003).
623:
624: \bibitem{bes-rev} D.\ R.\ Bes, R.\ A.\ Broglia, O.\ Hansen, O.\ Nathan,
625: {\it Phys.\ Rep.} {\bf 34}, 1 (1977).
626:
627: \bibitem{MFCC.00} A.\ O.\ Macchiavelli, P.\ Fallon, R.\ M.\ Clark, M.\ Cromaz,
628: M.\ A.\ Deleplanque, R.\ M.\ Diamond, G.\ J.\ Lane, I.\ Y.\ Lee, F.\ S.\ Stephens,
629: C.\ E.\ Svensson, K.\ Vetter, and D.\ Ward, {\it Phys.\ Lett.} {\bf B480}, 1 (2000).
630:
631: \bibitem{GSMLSS.01} E.\ Garrido, P.\ Sarriguren, E.\ Moya de Guerra,
632: U.\ Lombardo, P.\ Schuck, H.\ J.\ Schulze, {\it Phys.\ Rev.} {\bf C63}, 037304
633: (2001).
634:
635: \bibitem{ZZ.91} D.\ C.\ Zheng and L.\ Zamick, {\it Ann.\ Phys.} (N.Y.) {\bf 206},
636: 106 (1991).
637:
638: \bibitem{SatW.97} S.\ Satu{\l}a and R.\ Wyss, {\it Phys.\ Lett.} {\bf B393}, 1 (1997).
639:
640: \bibitem{AF.05} A.\ V.\ Afanasjev and S.\ Frauendorf, {\it Phys.\ Rev.} {\bf C71},
641: 064318 (2005).
642:
643: \bibitem{MBK.89} K.\ Muto, E.\ Bender, and H.\ V.\ Klapdor, Z.\ Phys. {\bf A334},
644: 47 (1989).
645:
646: \bibitem{EPSVD.97} J.\ Engel, S.\ Pittel, M.\ Stoitsov, P.\ Vogel, and
647: J.\ Dukelsky, {\it Phys.\ Rev.} {\bf C55}, 1781 (1997).
648:
649: \bibitem{MPK.03} P.\ M\"oller, B.\ Pfeiffer, and K.-L.\ Kratz,
650: {\it Phys.\ Rev.} {\bf C67}, 055802 (2003).
651:
652: \bibitem{NMVPR.05} T.\ Nik\v{s}i\'{c}, T.\ Marketin, D.\ Vretenar, N.\ Paar, and
653: P.\ Ring, {\it Phys.\ Rev.} {\bf C71}, 014308 (2005).
654:
655: \bibitem{PSVF.96} G.\ Pantis, F.\ Simkovic, J.\ D.\ Vergados,
656: A.\ Faessler, {\it Phys.\ Rev.} {\bf C53}, 695 (1996).
657:
658: \bibitem{CHHR.99} O.\ Civitarese, P.\ O.\ Hess, J.\ G.\ Hirsch, and M.\ Reboiro,
659: {\it Phys.\ Rev.} {\bf C59}, 194 (1999).
660:
661: \bibitem{F.70} P.\ Fr{\"o}brich, {\it Z.\ Phys.} {\bf 236}, 153 (1970).
662:
663: \bibitem{F.71} P.\ Fr{\"o}brich, {\it Phys.\ Lett.} {\bf B37}, 338 (1971).
664:
665: \bibitem{GSW.04} S.\ G{\l}owacz, W.\ Satu{\l}a, and R.\ A.\ Wyss,
666: {\it Eur.\ Phys.\ J.} {\bf A19}, 33 (2004).
667:
668: \bibitem{RSSN.98} G.\ R\"opke, A.\ Schnell, P.\ Schuck, and P.\ Nozi\`{e}res,
669: {\it Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.} {\bf 80}, 3177 (1998).
670:
671: \bibitem{HK.00} M.\ Hasegawa and K.\ Kaneko, {\it Phys.\ Rev.} {\bf C61}, 037306
672: (2000).
673:
674: \bibitem{KZ.98} K.\ Kaneko and J.\ Zhang, {\it Phys.\ Rev.} {\bf C57}, 1732 (1998).
675:
676: \bibitem{SW.00} J.\ A.\ Sheikh and R.\ Wyss, {\it Phys.\ Rev.} {\bf C62}, 051302(R) (2000).
677:
678: \bibitem{SatW.00} S.\ Satu{\l}a and R.\ Wyss, {\it Nucl.\ Phys.} {\bf A676}, 120 (2000).
679:
680: \bibitem{G.01} A.\ L.\ Goodman, {\it Phys.\ Rev.} {\bf C63}, 044325 (1999).
681:
682: \bibitem{73Kr} N.\ S.\ Kelsall, S.\ M.\ Fischer, D.\ P.\ Balamuth, G.\ C.\ Ball,
683: M.\ P.\ Carpenter, R.\ M.\ Clark, J.\ Durell, P.\ Fallon, S.\ J.\ Freeman,
684: P.\ A.\ Hausladen, R.\ V.\ F.\ Janssens, D.\ G.\ Jenkins, M.\ J.\ Leddy,
685: C.\ J.\ Lister, A.\ O.\ Macchiavelli, D.\ G.\ Sarantites, D.\ C.\ Schmidt,
686: D.\ Seweryniak, C.\ E.\ Svensson, B.\ J.\ Varley, S.\ Vincent, R.\ Wadsworth,
687: A.\ N.\ Wilson, A.\ V.\ Afanasjev, S.\ Frauendorf, I.\ Ragnarsson and
688: R.\ Wyss, {\it Phys.\ Rev.} {\bf C65}, 044331 (2002).
689:
690: \bibitem{G.99} A.\ L.\ Goodman, {\it Phys.\ Rev.} {\bf C60}, 014311 (1999).
691:
692: \bibitem{DH.95} J.\ Dobaczewski and I.\ Hamamoto, {\it Phys.\ Lett.} {\bf B345}, 181 (1995).
693:
694: \bibitem{Kr72a} C.\ Andreoiu, C.\ E.\ Svensson, R.\ A.\ E.\ Austin, M.\ P.\ Carpenter,
695: D.\ Dashdorj, P.\ Finlay, S.\ J.\ Freeman, P.\ E.\ Garrett, A.\ G{\"o}rgen, J.\ Greene,
696: G.\ F.\ Grinyer, B.\ Hyland, D.\ Jenkins, F.\ Johnston-Theasby, P.\ Joshi,
697: A.\ O.\ Macchiavelli, F.\ Moore, G.\ Mukherjee, A.\ A.\ Phillips, W.\ Reviol, D.\ G.\
698: Sarantites, M.\ A.\ Schumaker, D.\ Seweryniak, M.\ B.\ Smith, J.\ J.\ Valiente-Dobon,
699: and R.\ Wadsworth, {\it Phys.\ Scripta} {\bf T125}, 127 (2006).
700:
701: \bibitem{Kr72b} C.\ Andreoiu, C.\ E.\ Svensson, A.\ V.\ Afanasjev,
702: R.\ A.\ E.\ Austin, M.\ P.\ Carpenter,
703: D.\ Dashdorj, P.\ Finlay, S.\ J.\ Freeman, P.\ E.\ Garrett, J.\ Greene, G.\ F.\ Grinyer,
704: A.\ G\"orgen, B.\ Hyland, D.\ Jenkins, F.\ Johnston-Theasby, P.\ Joshi, A.\ O.\ Machiavelli,
705: F.\ Moore, G.\ Mukherjee, A.\ A.\ Phillips, W.\ Reviol, D.\ G.\ Sarantites,
706: M.\ A.\ Schumaker, D.\ Seweryniak, M.\ B.\ Smith, J.J.~Valiente-Dob\'on, R.~Wadsworth,
707: {\it submitted to Phys. Rev. C}
708:
709: \bibitem{Kr72-ing} B.\ G.\ Carlsson and I.\ Ragnarsson, American Institute of
710: Physics, Conference Proceedings 831, Int. Conference {\it ``Frontiers in Nuclear
711: Structure, Astrophysics, and Reactions: FINUSTAR''}, edited by S.\ V.\ Harissopulos,
712: P.\ Demetriou, and R.\ Julin, (2006) p.\ 60.
713:
714: \bibitem{A190} A.\ V.\ Afanasjev, J.\ K{\"o}nig, and P.\ Ring, {\it Phys.\ Rev.} {\bf C60},
715: 051303 (1999).
716:
717: \bibitem{CRHB} A.\ V.\ Afanasjev, P.\ Ring, and J.\ K{\"o}nig, {\it Nucl.\ Phys.} {\bf A676},
718: 196 (2000).
719:
720: \bibitem{VRAL.05} D.\ Vretenar, A.\ V.\ Afanasjev, G.\ Lalazissis, and P.\ Ring,
721: {\it Phys.\ Rep.} {\bf 409}, 101 (2005).
722:
723: \bibitem{Giacomo} G.\ de Angelis, C.\ Fahlander, A.\ Gadea, E.\ Farnea,
724: W.\ Gelletly, A.\ Aprahamian, D.\ Bazzacco, F.\ Becker, P.\ G.\ Bizzeti,
725: A.\ Bizzeti-Sona, F. Brandolini, D.\ de Acu\~{n}a, M.\ De Poli, J.\ Eberth,
726: D.\ Foltescu, S.\ M.\ Lenzi, S.\ Lunardi, T.\ Martinez, D.\ R.\ Napoli,
727: P.\ Pavan, C.\ M.\ Petrache, C.\ Rossi Alvarez, D.\ Rudolph, B.\ Rubio,
728: W.\ Satu{\l}a, S.\ Skoda, P.\ Spolaore, H.\ G.\ Thomas, C.\ A.\ Ur, and R.\ Wyss,
729: {\it Phys.\ Lett.} {\bf B415}, 217 (1997).
730:
731:
732: \bibitem{Beng85} T.\ Bengtsson and I.\ Ragnarsson, {\it Nucl.\ Phys.} {\bf A436}, 14 (1985).
733:
734: \bibitem{A110} A.\ V.\ Afanasjev and I.\ Ragnarsson, {\it Nucl.\ Phys.} {\bf A591}, 387 (1995).
735:
736: \bibitem{PhysRep} A.\ V.\ Afanasjev, D.\ B.\ Fossan, G.\ J.\ Lane and I.\ Ragnarsson, {\it Phys.\
737: Rep.} {\bf 322}, 1 (1999).
738:
739: \bibitem{KR.89} W.\ Koepf and P.\ Ring, {\it Nucl.\ Phys.} {\bf A493}, 61 (1989).
740:
741: \bibitem{KR.93} J.\ K{\"o}nig and P.\ Ring, {\it Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.} {\bf 71}, 3079 (1993).
742:
743: \bibitem{A150} A.\ V.\ Afanasjev, J.\ K\"onig and P.\ Ring, {\it Nucl.\ Phys.} {\bf A608},
744: 107 (1996).
745:
746: \bibitem{NL3} G.\ A.\ Lalazissis, J.\ K\"onig and P.\ Ring, {\it Phys.\ Rev.} {\bf C55},
747: 540 (1997).
748:
749: \bibitem{D1S} J.\ F.\ Berger, M.\ Girod, and D.\ Gogny, {\it Comp.\ Phys.\ Comm.} {\bf 63},
750: 365 (1991).
751:
752: \bibitem{Br70}
753: D.\ G.\ Jenkins, N.\ S.\ Kelsall, C.\ J.\ Lister, D.\ P.\ Balamuth, M.\ P.\ Carpenter,
754: T.\ A.\ Sienko, S.\ M.\ Fischer, R.\ M.\ Clark, P.\ Fallon, A.\ G\"orgen, A.\ O.\ Macchiavelli,
755: C.\ E.\ Svensson, R.\ Wadsworth, W.\ Reviol, D.\ G.\ Sarantites, G.\ C.\ Ball,
756: J.\ Rikovska Stone, O.\ Juillet, P.\ van Isacker, A.\ V.\ Afanasjev and S.\ Frauendorf,
757: {\it Phys.\ Rev.} {\bf C65}, 064307 (2002).
758:
759: \bibitem{TWH.98} J.\ Terasaki, R.\ Wyss, and P.-H.\ Heenen, {\it Phys.\ Lett.} {\bf B437},
760: 1 (1998).
761:
762: \bibitem{A250} A.\ V.\ Afanasjev, T.\ L.\ Khoo, S.\ Frauendorf, G.\ A.\ Lalazissis,
763: and I.\ Ahmad, {\it Phys.\ Rev.} {\bf C67}, 024309 (2003).
764:
765: \bibitem{GBI.86} D.\ Galeriu, D.\ Bucurescu, and M.\ Iva\c{s}ku, {\it J.\ Phys. G} {\bf 12}, 329
766: (1986).
767:
768: \bibitem{Fisher} S.\ M.\ Fischer, C.\ J.\ Lister, D.\ P.\ Balamuth, R.\ Bauer,
769: J.\ A.\ Becker, L.\ A.\ Bernstein, M.\ P.\ Carpenter, J.\ Durell, N.\ Fotiades,
770: S.\ J.\ Freeman, P.\ E.\ Garrett, P.\ A.\ Hausladen, R.\ V.\ F.\ Janssens, D.\ Jenkins,
771: M.\ Leddy, J.\ Ressler, J.\ Schwartz, D.\ Svelnys, D.\ G.\ Sarantites, D.\ Seweryniak,
772: B.\ J.\ Varley, and R.\ Wyss, {\it Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.} {\bf 87}, 132501 (2001).
773:
774: \bibitem{A60} A.\ V.\ Afanasjev, I.\ Ragnarsson and P.\ Ring, {\it Phys.\ Rev.}
775: {\bf C59}, 3166 (1999).
776:
777: \bibitem{Kr73} N.\ S.\ Kelsall, S.\ M.\ Fischer, D.\ P.\ Balamuth, G.\ C.\ Ball,
778: M.\ P.\ Carpenter, R.\ M.\ Clark, J.\ Durell, P.\ Fallon, S.\ J.\ Freeman,
779: P.\ A.\ Hausladen, R.\ V.\ F.\ Janssens, D.\ G.\ Jenkins, M.\ J.\ Leddy,
780: C.\ J.\ Lister, A.\ O.\ Macchiavelli, D.\ G.\ Sarantites, D.\ C.\ Schmidt,
781: D.\ Seweryniak, C.\ E.\ Svensson, B.\ J.\ Varley, S.\ Vincent, R.\ Wadsworth,
782: A.\ N.\ Wilson, A.\ V.\ Afanasjev, S.\ Frauendorf, I.\ Ragnarsson and
783: R.\ Wyss, {\it Phys.\ Rev.} {\bf C65}, 044331 (2002).
784:
785:
786: \bibitem{Cu59} C.\ Andreoiu, D.\ Rudolph, C.\ E.\ Svensson, A.\ V.\ Afanasjev,
787: J.\ Dobaczewski, I.\ Ragnarsson, C.\ Baktash, J.\ Eberth, C.\ Fahlander, D.\ S.\ Haslip,
788: D.\ R.\ LaFosse, S.\ D.\ Paul, D.\ G.\ Sarantites, H.\ G.\ Thomas, J.\ C.\ Waddington,
789: W.\ Weintraub, J.\ N. Wilsson and C.-H.\ Yu, {\it Phys.\ Rev.} {\bf C62}, 051301(R)
790: (2000).
791:
792: \bibitem{Sr76}
793: P.\ J.\ Davies, A.\ V.\ Afanasjev, R.\ Wadsworth, C.\ Andreoiu, R.\ A.\ E.\ Austin,
794: M.\ P.\ Carpenter, D.\ Dashdorj, S.\ J.\ Freeman, P.\ E.\ Garrett, A.\ G\"orgen,
795: J.\ Greene, D.\ G.\ Jenkins, F.\ L.\ Johnston-Theasby, P.\ Joshi, A.\ O.\ Macchiavelli,
796: F.\ Moore, G.\ Mukherjee, W.\ Reviol, D.\ Sarantites, D.\ Seweryniak, M.\ B.\ Smith,
797: C.\ E.\ Svensson, J.\ J.\ Valiente-Dobon, D.\ Ward, {\it submitted to Phys.\ Rev.\ C}.
798:
799: \bibitem{Pingst-A30-60} A.\ V.\ Afanasjev, P.\ Ring and I.\ Ragnarsson,
800: Proc. Int. Workshop PINGST2000 "Selected topics on $N=Z$ nuclei",
801: 2000, Lund, Sweden, Eds. D.\ Rudolph and M. Hellstr{\"o}m, (2000)
802: p.\ 183.
803:
804: \bibitem{SRR.02} J.\ A.\ Sheikh, P.\ Ring, and R.\ Rossignoli, {\it Phys.\ Rev.}
805: {\bf C66}, 044318 (2006).
806:
807: \bibitem{Kr73Rb74-def} F.\ Johnston-Theasby {\it et al, in preparation, to
808: be submitted to Phys.\ Rev. C.}
809:
810: \bibitem{Kr74} J.\ J.\ Valiente-Dob\'on, T.\ Steinhardt, C.\ E.\ Svensson,
811: I.\ Ragnarsson, A.\ V.\ Afanasjev, C.\ Andreoiu, R.\ A.\ E.\ Austin,
812: M.\ P.\ Carpenter, D.\ Dashdorj, G.~de~Angelis, F.\ D\"onau, J.\ Eberth,
813: E.\ Farnea, P.\ Finlay, S.\ J.\ Freeman, A.\ Gadea, P.\ E.\ Garrett,
814: A.\ G\"orgen, G.\ F.\ Grinyer, B.\ Hyland, D.\ Jenkins, F.\ Johnston-Theasby,
815: P.\ Joshi, A.\ Jungclaus, K.\ P.\ Lieb, A.\ O.\ Macchiavelli, F.\ Moore,
816: G.\ Mukherjee, D.\ R.\ Napoli, A.\ A.\ Phillips, C.\ Plettner,
817: W.\ Reviol, D.\ Sarantites, H.\ Schnare, M.\ A.\ Schumaker, R.\ Schwengner,
818: D.\ Seweryniak, M.\ B.\ Smith, I.\ Stefanescu, O.\ Thelen, R.\ Wadsworth,
819: D.\ Ward, {\it Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.} {\bf 95}, 232501 (2005).
820:
821: \bibitem{Gogny} M.\ Anguiano, J.\ L.\ Egido and L.\ M.\ Robledo,
822: {\it Nucl.\ Phys.} {\bf A683}, 227 (2001).
823:
824: \bibitem{Zn60SD} C.\ E.\ Svensson, D.\ Rudolph, C.\ Baktash, M.\ A.\ Bentley,
825: J.\ A.\ Cameron, M.\ P.\ Carpenter, M.\ Devlin, J.\ Eberth, S.\ Flibotte,
826: A.\ Galindo-Uribarri, G.\ Hackman, D.\ S.\ Haslip, R.\ V.\ F.\ Janssens,
827: D.\ R.\ LaFosse, T.\ J.\ Lampman, I.\ Y.\ Lee, F.\ Lerma, A.\ O.\ Macchiavelli,
828: J.\ M.\ Nieminen, S.\ D.\ Paul, D.\ C.\ Radford, P.\ Reiter, L.\ L.\ Riedinger,
829: D.\ G.\ Sarantites, B.\ Schaly, D.\ Seweryniak, O.\ Thelen, H.\ G.\ Thomas,
830: J.\ C.\ Waddington, D.\ Ward, W.\ Weintraub, J.\ N.\ Wilson, C.\ H.\ Yu, A.\ V.\
831: Afanasjev, and I.\ Ragnarsson, {\it Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.}, {\bf 82}, 3400
832: (1999).
833:
834: \bibitem{fisch03} S.\ M.\ Fischer, C.\ J.\ Lister and D.\ P.\ Balamuth,
835: {\it Phys. Rev.} {\bf C67}, 064318 (2003).
836:
837: \bibitem{kel02} N.\ S.\ Kelsall, C.\ E.\ Svensson, S.\ Fischer,
838: D.\ E.\ Appelbe, R.\ A.\ E.\ Austin, D.\ P.\ Balamuth,
839: G.\ C.\ Ball, J.\ A.\ Cameron, M.\ P.\ Carpenter, R.\ M.\ Clark,
840: M.\ Cromaz, M.\ A.\ Deleplanque, R.\ M.\ Diamond, J.\ L.\ Durell,
841: P.\ Fallon, S.\ J.\ Freeman, P.\ A.\ Hausladen, D.\ F.\ Hodgson,
842: R.\ V.\ F.\ Janssens, D.\ G.\ Jenkins, G.\ J.\ Lane, M.\ J.\ Leddy,
843: C.\ J.\ Lister, A.\ O.\ Macchiavelli, C.\ D.\ O'Leary, D.\ G.\ Sarantites,
844: F.\ S.\ Stephens, D.\ C.\ Schmidt, D.\ Seweryniak, B.\ J.\ Varley,
845: S.\ Vincent, K.\ Vetter, J.\ C.\ Waddington, R.\ Wadsworth,
846: D.\ Ward, A.\ N.\ Wilson, A.\ V.\ Afanasjev, S.\ Frauendorf,
847: I.\ Ragnarsson and R.\ Wyss, Proc.\ Int.\ Conf. on ``Frontiers
848: of Nuclear Structure'', (Berkeley, California, 2002), AIP
849: Conf. Proc. v. 656, Eds. P. Fallon and R. Clark, (Melville, New York,
850: 2003) p.\ 261.
851:
852:
853: \bibitem{Ge64-exp} P.\ J.\ Ennis, C.\ J.\ Lister, W.\ Gelletly, H.\ G.\ Price,
854: B.\ J.\ Varley, P.\ A.\ Butler, T.\ Hoare, S.\ Cwiok, W.\ Nazarewicz,
855: {\it Nucl.\ Phys.} {\bf A535}, 392 (1991).
856:
857:
858:
859:
860:
861:
862:
863:
864:
865:
866:
867:
868:
869:
870:
871:
872:
873:
874:
875: \end{thebibliography}
876:
877: \end{document}
878:
879:
880: