- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine
All JournalsPhysics Magazine
Access Provided by Xinjiang University

Physical Review Journals Archive

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Access by Xinjiang University

Theory of the Photo- and Electrodisintegration of Be9

Eugene Guth and Charles J. Mullin

  • University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, Indiana

PDF

Phys. Rev. 76, 234 – Published 15 July, 1949

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.76.234

Abstract

Cross sections for the photo- and electrodisintegration processes at relatively low energies have been calculated as a function of energy on the basis of a simple model of the Be9 nucleus in which a neutron is assumed to move in the potential well provided by the remainder of the nucleus. According to the theory, the disintegration at low energies results primarily from electric dipole transitions from the ground P32 state to S and D states in the positive energy continuum. Magnetic dipole disintegration does not seem to play an important role. In order to obtain agreement between the theoretical and empirical photo-disintegration cross sections, it seems necessary to make the plausible assumption that the interaction between the prospective photo-neutron and the remaining nucleons of the nucleus is a function of the orbital angular momentum of the system (Majorana interaction). Furthermore, complete neglect of the P32−P12 splitting of the lowest P state leads to an angular distribution of the ejected neutrons which does not agree with the (preliminary) empirical results.

Using the Born-Møller Approximation, the cross section for electrodisintegration has been calculated in terms of the photo-disintegration cross section. This method yields a correlation, which is independent of the nuclear model, between the observed photo- and electrodisintegration cross sections.

The theory based upon the simple model described seems adequate for an interpretation of the experimental data.

View figure in article

References (36)

  1. E. Guth and C. J. Mullin, Phys. Rev. 74, 833 (1948) Guth, Mullin, and Marshall, 74, 834 (1948)
  2. Russell, Sachs, Wattenberg, and Fields, Phys. Rev. 73, 545 (1948)
  3. Collins, Waldman, and Guth, Phys. Rev. 55, 875 (1939)
  4. Marcellus L. Wiedenbeck, Phys. Rev. 69, 236 (1945)
  5. K. E. Davis and M. Hafner, Phys. Rev. 73, 1473 (1948)
  6. Conrad L. Longmire, Phys. Rev. 74, 1773 (1948) thesis, University of Rochester, 1948
  7. E. Guth and C. J. Mullin, Phys. Rev. 74, 832 (1948)
  8. E. Feenberg and E. Wigner, Phys. Rev. 51, 95 (1937)
  9. M. E. Rose and H. A. Bethe, Phys. Rev. 51, 205 (1937)
  10. Robert G. Sachs, Phys. Rev. 55, 825 (1939)
  11. Kusch, Millman, and Rabi, Phys. Rev. 55, 666 (1939)
  12. W. Paul, Zeits. f. Physik 117, 774 (1941)
  13. Collins, Waldman, and Guth ([3]) R. E. Bell and L. G. Elliott (Phys. Rev. 74, 1552 (1948))
  14. Eugene Guth, Phys. Rev. 55, 411 (1939)
  15. E. Glückauf and F. A. Paneth, Proc. Roy. Soc. A165, 229 (1938) Arthur Hemmendinger, Phys. Rev. 73, 806 (1948)
  16. Ogle, Brown, and Conklin, Phys. Rev. 71, 378 (1947) 73, 648 (1948)
  17. T. Schmidt (Zeits. f. Physik 106, 358 (1937)) Margenau and Wigner (Phys. Rev. 58, 103 (1940)) Kusch, Millman, and Rabi ([11])
  18. V. I. Mamasachlisov, J. Phys. U.S.S.R. 7, 239 (1943)
  19. H. A. Bethe and R. Peierls, Proc. Roy. Soc. A148, 146 (1935)
  20. G. C. Wick, Ricerca Scient. 11, 49 (1940) B. Peters and C. Richman, Phys. Rev. 59, 804 (1941)
  21. P. Caldirola, J. de phys. et rad. 8, 155 (1947)
  22. V. I. Mamasachlisov, Physik. Zeits. Sowjetunion 9 (1936)
  23. A. Borsellino, Nuovo Cimento 5, No. 4 (1948)
  24. F. Schlögl, Zeits. f. Naturforschung 3a, 229 (1948)
  25. H. Staub and H. Tatel, Phys. Rev. 58, 820 (1940) H. Staub and W. E. Stephens, 55, 131 (1939)
  26. S. M. Dancoff, Phys. Rev. 58, 326 (1940)
  27. L. G. Elliott and R. E. Bell, Phys. Rev. 74, 1869 (1948) L. H. Rumbaugh and L. R. Hafstad, 50, 681 (1936) W. Hornyak and T. Lauritsen, Rev. Mod. Phys. 20, 191 (1948)
  28. David R. Inglis, Phys. Rev. 50, 783 (1936) 56, 1178 (1939) G. Breit and J. R. Stehn, 53, 459 (1938) Charles Kittel, 62, 109 (1942) S. Hanna and D. R. Inglis, 75, 1767 (1949) D. R. Inglis, 75, 1767 (1949)
  29. C. Breit and J. K. Knipp, Phys. Rev. 54, 652 (1938) Emil Jan Konopinski, Rev. Mod. Phys. 15, 209 (1943)
  30. Gordy, Ring, and Burg, Phys. Rev. 74, 1191 (1948) M. Goldhaber, 74, 1194 (1948)
  31. David R. Inglis, Phys. Rev. 74, 1876 (1948)

  32. Omitted endnote

  33. T. Goloborodko and L. Rosenkewitch, Physik. Zeits. Sowjetunion 11, 78 (1936) J. Chadwick and M. Goldhaber, Proc. Roy. Soc. A151, 479 (1935)
  34. B. Hamermesh and A. Wattenberg, Phys. Rev. 75, 1290(A) (1949) B. Hamermesh, M. Hamermesh, and A. Wattenberg (scheduled for publication in Aug. 15, 1949) E. P. Meiners (private communication) C. J. Mullin and E. Guth (to be published in Phys. Rev. August 15, 1949)

  35. Omitted endnote

  36. C. Møller, Ann. d. Physik 14, 531 (1932) L. Rosenfeld, Nuclear Forces I (Interscience Publishers, New York, 1948), pp. 138-141 M. Lax and H. Feshbach (to be published soon)

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. 76, 234– Published 15 July, 1949
  • Received 14 February 1949

© 1949 American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation