4.5 Article

Description of 93Nb stellar electron-capture rates by the projected shell model

Journal

PHYSICAL REVIEW C
Volume 104, Issue 6, Pages -

Publisher

AMER PHYSICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevC.104.064323

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [SWU019013]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [11905175, 11875225, U1932206]
  3. National Key Program for S&T Research and Development [2016YFA0400501]
  4. Venture & Innovation Support Program for Chongqing Overseas Returnees [cx2019056]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In this study, the projected-shell model was used to investigate electron capture processes by nuclei, comparing different models for the EC rates of 93Nb -> 93Zr and discussing important factors in theoretical models for stellar environments.
Capture of electrons by nuclei is an important process in stellar environments where excited nuclear states are thermally populated. However, accurate treatment for excited configurations in electron capture (EC) rates has been an unsolved problem for medium-heavy and heavy nuclei. In this work, we take the 93Nb -> 93Zr EC rates as the example to introduce the projected-shell model (PSM) in which excited configurations are explicitly included as multi-quasiparticle states. Applying the prevalent assumption that the parent nucleus always stays in its ground state in stellar conditions, we critically compare the obtained PSM results with the recently measured Gamow-Teller transition data, and with the previous calculations by the conventional shell model and the quasiparticle random-phase approximation. We discuss important ingredients that are required in theoretical models used for stellar EC calculations, and demonstrate effects of the explicit inclusion of excited nuclear states in EC rate calculations, especially when both electron density and environment temperature are high.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available