4.8 Article

Nuclear Charge Radii of the Nickel Isotopes 58-68,70Ni

Journal

PHYSICAL REVIEW LETTERS
Volume 128, Issue 2, Pages -

Publisher

AMER PHYSICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.128.022502

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. European Union [654002]
  2. Max-Planck Society
  3. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, German Research Foundation) [279384907-SFB 1245]
  4. Collaborative Research Center [The Low-Energy Frontier of the Standard Model] [SFB 1044]
  5. Cluster of Excellence Precision Physics, Fundamental Interactions, and Structure of Matter - DFG within the German Excellence Strategy [PRISMA+ EXC 2118/1, 39083149]
  6. BMBF [05P18RDCIA, 05P18RDFN1, 05P19RDFN1]
  7. FWO (Belgium)
  8. KU Leuven [GOA 15/010]
  9. NSERC
  10. Office of Nuclear Physics, U.S. Department of Energy [DE-FG02-96ER40963, DE-SC0013365, DE-SC0018083, DE-SC0018223]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Collinear laser spectroscopy was used to study the nuclear charge radii of nickel isotopes. Three ab initio methods were compared, with agreement in differential radii but only the NNLOsat method showing consistent absolute radii. The Skyrme functional SV-min was found to match experimental results more closely in nuclear density functional theory.
Collinear laser spectroscopy is performed on the nickel isotopes Ni-58-68,Ni-70, using a time-resolved photon counting system. From the measured isotope shifts, nuclear charge radii R-c are extracted and compared to theoretical results. Three ab initio approaches all employ, among others, the chiral interaction NNLOsat, which allows an assessment of their accuracy. We find agreement with experiment in differential radii delta < r(c)(2)> for all employed ab initio methods and interactions, while the absolute radii are consistent with data only for NNLOsat. Within nuclear density functional theory, the Skyrme functional SV-min matches experiment more closely than the Fayans functional Fy(Delta r, HFB).

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