4.8 Article

Direct Q-Value Determination of the β- Decay of 187Re

Journal

PHYSICAL REVIEW LETTERS
Volume 127, Issue 7, Pages -

Publisher

AMER PHYSICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.127.072502

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Max Planck Society
  2. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, German Research Foundation) [273811115-SFB 1225]
  3. DFG Research UNIT FOR 2202
  4. NIST
  5. Unite Mixte de Recherche de Sorbonne Universite, de ENS-PSL Research University, du College de France et du CNRS [8552]
  6. Russian Minobrnauki [10]
  7. Allianz Program of the Helmholtz Association [EMMI HA-216]
  8. European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union [832848-FunI]
  9. International Max Planck Research School for Precision Tests of Fundamental Symmetries (IMPRS-PTFS)
  10. Max Planck PTB RIKEN Center for Time, Constants, and Fundamental Symmetries

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In this study, the cyclotron frequency ratio of Os-187(29+) to Re-187(29+) ions was measured with the Penning-trap mass spectrometer PENTATRAP, resulting in the most precise measurement to date. The total binding-energy difference of the 29 missing electrons in Re and Os was calculated, yielding a value of 53.5(10) eV. Finally, using the achieved results, the mass difference between neutral 187Re and Os-187, i.e., the Q value of the beta(-) decay of Re-187, was determined to be 2470.9(13) eV.
The cyclotron frequency ratio of Os-187(29+) to Re-187(29+) ions was measured with the Penning-trap mass spectrometer PENTATRAP. The achieved result of R = 1.000 000 013 882(5) is to date the most precise such measurement performed on ions. Furthermore, the total binding-energy difference of the 29 missing electrons in Re and Os was calculated by relativistic multiconfiguration methods, yielding the value of Delta E = 53.5(10) eV. Finally, using the achieved results, the mass difference between neutral 187Re and Os-187, i.e., the Q value of the beta(-) decay of Re-187, is determined to be 2470.9(13) eV.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available