Revealing secrets of atomic nuclei

Only the lonely...(reveal the secrets of atomic nuclei)
Individual proton or neutron in outermost shell of large atomic nucleus turns out not to behave according to the predictions made by existing theoretical models. This surprising conclusion was reached by an international team of physicists including staff members from the Faculty of Physics at the University of Warsaw. Credit: ©Faculty of Physics, University of Warsaw

Individual protons and neutrons in atomic nuclei turn out not to behave according to the predictions made by existing theoretical models. This surprising conclusion, reached by an international team of physicists including staff members from the Faculty of Physics at the University of Warsaw (UW), forces us to reconsider how we have been describing large atomic nuclei for the past several decades.

Atomic nuclei shape the nature of our reality: around 99.9% of the mass of all matter is contained within them. Yet in spite of their ubiquity and significance, they still remain relatively poorly understood by contemporary physics. The main barrier to formulating a consistent theoretical description of atomic nuclei is the complexity of the interactions between their component particles, namely protons and . The situation becomes even more complicated when the nucleus contains a high number of particles. Writing in the prestigious physics journal Physical Review Letters, a team of scientists from Poland (UW Faculty of Physics), Finland and Sweden have demonstrated that we have to modify the existing model of atomic nuclei containing a significant and almost magic number of both protons and neutrons.

"We have shown that one of the two main physical factors taken into consideration in our models of certain large atomic nuclei is not actually all that significant. In practice, this means that the physics of such nuclei operate in a slightly different way than previously thought," says Prof. Jacek Dobaczewski from the Institute of Theoretical Physics at the UW Faculty of Physics.

When describe the motion of electrons in atoms, they generally assume that they move in an electrostatic field originating from the neighbouring electrons and from the distant . The model predicts the formation of distinct electron shells with different capacities: the first can fit the maximum of 2 electrons, with 8 on the second, 18 on the third, and so on. Physicists also apply a similar model to the atomic nuclei themselves; however, this is made more difficult by the complex interactions between subatomic particles within the nucleus.

"In atoms, each electron is located at a great distance from other electrons and the atomic nucleus. As such, we can safely assume that distinct electrons move in a single, averaged field of interactions originating from the remaining atomic components. However, protons and neutrons in atomic nuclei are very close together, and they all exist in a field which they also actively shape," explains Dr. Dimitar Tarpanov (University of Warsaw).

As is the case with electrons, the averaged-field model predicts the existence of shells within the nucleus - shells with the greatest probability of a proton or a neutron being found there. Subsequent nuclear shells are complete when they contain 2, 8, 20, 28, 50, 82, and 126 protons (the same numbers apply to neutron shells). Additional filled shells appear at levels 114, 120 and 126 for protons, and 184 for neutrons. These are known as "magic" numbers; an atomic nucleus is dubbed as being "double magic" when it contains a magic number of protons alongside a magic number of neutrons.

The researchers were especially interested in situations where an atomic nucleus is in an almost double magic state: one of the shells is complete, whereas the next, outermost shell contains just a single proton or neutron. The question was, what interactions will determine the motion of this "lonely" particle?

For several decades now, in order to remain consistent with measurements taken in physics laboratories around the globe, in addition to the averaged field the existing model of large atomic nuclei has taken account of additional effects: the vibrations and motions of nucleons caused by quantum effects. In certain cases, such vibrations may even affect the appearance of a nucleus by flattening it slightly or rendering it pear-shaped. Such modifications would also have to affect the field of motion of a solitary proton or neutron moving in the outermost shell of the atomic nucleus.

Physicists have used experimental data available for double magic nuclei of oxygen 16O, calcium 40Ca and 48Ca, nickel 56Ni, tin 132Sn and lead 208Pb, as well as for nearly double magic nuclei such as 207Pb and 209Pb. The data were used to precisely fit various parameters used in the existing model. Theoretical analysis leaves no doubt: quantum effects and the vibrations that go with them turn out to have a significantly lower effect on the motion of individual particles in the nuclear shell than previously thought.

"This is a fascinating result. Since quantum effects in a nucleus as large as 209Pb are not terribly significant, that means that the existing model of the average field itself does not fully reflect . There is something we are failing to take into account. I wonder what that is...?" adds Prof. Dobaczewski.

Such work on devising a precise and consistent description of phenomena occurring in light, heavy and superheavy atomic nuclei has significant practical applications. Our understanding of the physics of atomic nuclei is used in the construction of nuclear power plants, the design of future thermonuclear power plants, the military, nuclear medicine, tissue imaging, and in diagnostics and cancer therapies. Furthermore, nuclear processes and interactions are fundamental to the way we describe stars in the Universe. Theoretical methods developed to describe the interactions of many particles in atomic nuclei also have numerous applications in nuclear physics and condensed matter physics, and also in quantum chemistry, in the spectral analysis of excited states of , atoms and molecules.

The research has been financed through the ENSAR project ran as part of EU's FP7, Poland's National Science Centre, Finland's FIDIPRO academic programme, and the Bulgarian Research Fund.

Physics and Astronomy first appeared at the University of Warsaw in 1816, under the then Faculty of Philosophy. In 1825 the Astronomical Observatory was established. Currently, the Faculty of Physics' Institutes include Experimental Physics, Theoretical Physics, Geophysics, Department of Mathematical Methods and an Astronomical Observatory. Research covers almost all areas of modern , on scales from the quantum to the cosmological. The Faculty's research and teaching staff includes ca. 200 university teachers, of which 88 are employees with the title of professor. The Faculty of Physics, University of Warsaw, is attended by ca. 1000 students and more than 170 doctoral students.


Explore further

A surprisingly long-lived excited state in a neutron-rich nucleus

More information: "Spectroscopic properties of nuclear Skyrme energy density functionals"; D. Tarpanov, J. Dobaczewski, J. Toivanen, B.G. Carlsson; Physical Review Letters 113, 252501 (2014); DOI: dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.113.252501
Journal information: Physical Review Letters

Citation: Revealing secrets of atomic nuclei (2015, January 21) retrieved 23 August 2019 from https://phys.org/news/2015-01-revealing-secrets-atomic-nuclei.html
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.
67 shares

Feedback to editors

User comments

Jan 21, 2015
The reai secret of a nucleaus? What that we live on one?

Jan 21, 2015
What if we only consider 2 subatomic particles, the electrons and the protons. Define all the possible states these may possess and compare against empirical data. really we don't see the imaginary quarks until something else happens.

Jan 21, 2015
You know what I love about physics? Liberal use of the word 'magic', and a lot of question marks.

Jan 22, 2015
"This is a fascinating result. Since quantum effects in a nucleus as large as 209Pb are not terribly significant, that means that the existing model of the average field itself does not fully reflect reality. There is something we are failing to take into account. I wonder what that is...?" adds Prof. Dobaczewski


I'll bet its a quantum effect...
With the large number of electrons in a heavy atom you might think THEY would interact with each others charges and de-cohere: But quantum behaviour still reigns there.

Jan 22, 2015
Below is a link with a novel idea that could possibly shed some light on this subject.

Page 30:
http://www.scribd...-Physics

Jan 22, 2015
This comment has been removed by a moderator.

Jan 22, 2015
This comment has been removed by a moderator.

Jan 22, 2015
What if light according to Einstein theory was wrong. The minute we take equations to be facts we close our minds to philosophy. What if what we know as photons exist on every quantum level patterned after different colors we know in the proverbial spectrum. In other words c can't be a constant with light, impossible. what kind of light?? i think space is a lighted interpretation of life created by mind, a collective soul so to speak. Is the sun an illusion? It may be a reflective light of all life living(all the son's-people). The problem with science is that it can't be exact, because it closes the mind. Some of it we throw out there is just BS, and other ideas may be so simple, it's brilliant..LOL

Jan 22, 2015
Below is a link with a novel idea that could possibly shed some light on this subject.

Page 30:
http://www.scribd...-Physics

Excellent cite, Bill.
I will have to take some time, later to dig further into the whole paper.

Jan 22, 2015
@tomallen
...The problem with science is that it can't be exact, because it closes the mind...

Science can be as exact as we want it to be.
It's nature that isn't exact. If it was, well... we wouldn't be here discussing this, then...

Jan 24, 2015
What if we only consider 2 subatomic particles, the electrons and the protons. Define all the possible states these may possess and compare against empirical data. really we don't see the imaginary quarks until something else happens.


quarks are not imaginary.

Jan 25, 2015
Not surprising. I still think our physics is just a poor approximation. Until someone comes up with a theory that makes concrete accurate predictions, like the masses of the particles we had to determine experimentally, I think physics is in need of another revolution like Einstein caused. Physics needs a new revolutionary thinker. Who knows, maybe he's out there right now writing formula and flipping burgers, he may even have papers rejected already.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more