4.8 Article

Strong Neutron-γ Competition above the Neutron Threshold in the Decay of 70Co

期刊

PHYSICAL REVIEW LETTERS
卷 117, 期 14, 页码 -

出版社

AMER PHYSICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.117.142701

关键词

-

资金

  1. Research Council of Norway [205528, 210007]
  2. ERC-STG [637686]
  3. LLNL [DE-AC52-07NA27344]
  4. NNSA of the U.S. Department of Energy at Los Alamos National Laboratory [DE-AC52-06NA25396]
  5. National Science Foundation [PHY 1102511, PHY 1404442, PHY 0822648, PHY 1350234]
  6. NNSA [DE-NA-0000979, DE-NA-0002132]
  7. Direct For Mathematical & Physical Scien
  8. Division Of Physics [1430152, 1350234] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The beta-decay intensity of Co-70 was measured for the first time using the technique of total absorption spectroscopy. The large beta-decay Q value [12.3( 3) MeV] offers a rare opportunity to study beta-decay properties in a broad energy range. Two surprising features were observed in the experimental results, namely, the large fragmentation of the beta intensity at high energies, as well as the strong competition between. rays and neutrons, up to more than 2 MeV above the neutron-separation energy. The data are compared to two theoretical calculations: the shell model and the quasiparticle random phase approximation (QRPA). Both models seem to be missing a significant strength at high excitation energies. Possible interpretations of this discrepancy are discussed. The shell model is used for a detailed nuclear structure interpretation and helps to explain the observed gamma-neutron competition. The comparison to the QRPA calculations is done as a means to test a model that provides global beta-decay properties for astrophysical calculations. Our work demonstrates the importance of performing detailed comparisons to experimental results, beyond the simple half-life comparisons. A realistic and robust description of the beta-decay intensity is crucial for our understanding of nuclear structure as well as of gamma-process nucleosynthesis.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据