On the Problem of “Phase Transitions” in Nuclear Structure

  • G. Scharff-Goldhaber
Part of the Ettore Majorana International Science Series book series (EMISS, volume 10)

Abstract

In the setting of Brice, so evocative of Homeric adventures, it may be appropriate to state that the nuclear physicist is forced to steer perpetually between the Scylla of inductive and the Charybdis of deductive reasoning. The first approach consists in attempting to organize the empirical facts in as model independent a fashion as possible with the aim of describing them analytically in order to gain deeper insight. The second approach consists in model building, where the model, although usually based on vastly simplifying assumptions, is expected to yield completeness and accuracy in its predictions. The nuclear structure talks we have heard so far during this workshop have proven very effectively the success of an approach which belongs in the second category, namely that associated with the Interacting Boson Model (IBM), in classifying the complex band structure of even-even nuclei. On the other hand the inductive method yielded the Variable Moment of Inertia (VMI) equations,1,2 which give a precise description of ground state band energies of non-magic nuclei in terms of the rotational energy expression:

Keywords

Gamma Band Electric Quadrupole Moment Interact Boson Model Ground State Band Nucleon Pair 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    G. Scharff-Goldhaber, C. Dover, and A. L. Goodman, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Sci. 26:239 (1976) and references therein.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    G. Scharff-Goldhaber, Int. Conf. on Band Structure and Nuclear Dynamics, Nucl. Phys. A347:31 (1980). This reference will be referred to as I.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    T. K. Das, R. M. Dreizler, and A. Klein, Phys. Rev. C 2:632 (1970). The deviations of g.s. band energies according to IBM from VMI increase with increasing J. See G. Scharff-Goldhaber, J. Phys. G: Nucl. Phys 5:L207 (1979), Fig. lb.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    G. Scharff-Goldhaber, Phys. Rev. 103: 837 (1956).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    G. Scharff-Goldhaber and A. S. Goldhaber, Phys. Rev. Lett. 24: 1349 (1970).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    L. K. Peker et al., private communication (BNL-NCS 28090).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    A. S. Goldhaber and G. Scharff-Goldhaber, Phys. Rev. C 17: 1171 (1978).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    See Ref. 5, Fig. 1Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    G. Scharff-Goldhaber and M. Dresden, Transactions of the N. Y. Academy of Sciences, Ser. II, 40: 166 (1980).MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    B. Buck, L. C. Biedenharn, and R. Y. Cusson, Nucl. Phys. A317: 205 (1979).MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1981

Authors and Affiliations

  • G. Scharff-Goldhaber
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Brookhaven National LaboratoryUptonUSA
  2. 2.Cornell UniversityIthacaUSA

Personalised recommendations