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

Physical Review C

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Access by Xinjiang University

Bubble nuclei within the self-consistent Hartree-Fock mean field plus pairing approach

L. Tan Phuc1,2,*, N. Quang Hung1,†, and N. Dinh Dang3,4,‡

  • 1Institute of Fundamental and Applied Sciences, Duy Tan University, 3 Quang Trung, Danang City 550000, Vietnam
  • 2Faculty of Physics and Engineering Physics, Vietnam National University Ho Chi Minh City-University of Science, Ho Chi Minh 748355, Vietnam
  • 3Quantum Hadron Physics Laboratory, RIKEN Nishina Center for Accelerator-Based Science, 2-1 Hirosawa, Wako City, 351-0198 Saitama, Japan
  • 4Institute for Nuclear Science and Technique, Hanoi, 122100 Vietnam

  • *letanphuc191190@gmail.com
  • †nqhungdtu@gmail.com
  • ‡dang@riken.jp
PDF

Phys. Rev. C 97, 024331 – Published 23 February, 2018

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.97.024331

Abstract

The depletion of the nuclear density at its center, called the nuclear bubble, is studied within the Skyrme Hartree-Fock mean field consistently incorporating the superfluid pairing. The latter is obtained within the finite-temperature Bardeen-Cooper-Schrieffer theory and within the approach using the exact pairing. The numerical calculations are carried out for O22 and Si34 nuclei, whose bubble structures, caused by a very low occupancy of the 2s1/2 level, were previously predicted at T=0. Among 24 Skyrme interactions under consideration, the MSk3 is the only one which reproduces the experimentally measured occupancy of the 2s1/2 proton level as well as the binding energy, and consequently produces the most pronounced bubble structure in Si34. As compared to the approaches employing the same BSk14 interaction, our approach with exact pairing predicts a pairing effect which is stronger in O22 and weaker in Si34. The increase in temperature depletes the bubble structure and completely washes it out when the temperature reaches a critical value, at which the factor measuring the depletion of the nucleon density vanishes.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (66)

  1. H. A. Wilson, Phys. Rev. 69, 538 (1946).
  2. P. J. Siemens and H. A. Bethe, Phys. Rev. Lett. 18, 704 (1967).
  3. X. Campi and D. W. L. Sprung, Phys. Lett. B 46, 291 (1973).
  4. C. Y. Wong, Phys. Lett. B 41, 451 (1972).
  5. C. Y. Wong, Ann. Phys. 77, 279 (1973).
  6. O. Bohigas, X. Campi, H. Krivin, and J. Treiner, Phys. Lett. 64, 381 (1976).
  7. J. Friedrich and N. Voegler, Nucl. Phys. A 459, 10 (1986).
  8. E. Khan, M. Grasso, J. Margueron, and N. Van Giai, Nucl. Phys. A 800, 37 (2008).
  9. M. Grasso, L. Gaudefroy, E. Khan, T. Niksic, J. Piekarewicz, O. Sorlin, N. Van Giai, and D. Vretenar, Phys. Rev. C 79, 034318 (2009).
  10. J.-M. Yao, S. Baroni, M. Bender, and P.-H. Heenen, Phys. Rev. C 86, 014310 (2012).
  11. G. Saxena et al., Int. J. Mod. Phys. E 26, 1750072 (2017).
  12. K. Dietrich and K. Pomorski, Nucl. Phys. A 627, 175 (1997).
  13. M. Bender, K. Rutz, P.-G. Reinhard, J. A. Maruhn, and W. Greiner, Phys. Rev. C 60, 034304 (1999).
  14. J.-F. Berger, L. Bitaud, J. Dechargé, M. Girod, and K. Dietrich, Nucl. Phys. A 685, 1c (2001).
  15. J. Dechargé, J.-F. Berger, M. Girod, and K. Dietrich, Nucl. Phys. A 716, 55 (2003).
  16. W. J. Swiatecki, Phys. Scr. 28, 349 (1983).
  17. J. C. Pei, F. R. Xu, and P. D. Stevenson, Phys. Rev. C 71, 034302 (2005).
  18. J. M. Cavedon, B. Frois, D. Goutte, M. Huet, P. Leconte, C. N. Papanicolas, X.-H. Phan, S. K. Platchkov, S. Williamson, W. Boeglin, and I. Sick, Phys. Rev. Lett. 49, 978 (1982).
  19. V. R. Pandharipande et al., Rev. Mod. Phys. 69, 981 (1997).
  20. L. Zamick, V. Klemt, and J. Speth, Nucl. Phys. A 245, 365 (1975); A. Covello and G. Sartoris, ibid. 93, 481 (1967); N. Azziz and A. Covello, ibid. 123, 681 (1969).
  21. B. G. Todd-Rutel, J. Piekarewicz, and P. D. Cottle, Phys. Rev. C 69, 021301(R) (2004).
  22. Y. Chu, Z. Ren, Z. Wang, and T. Dong, Phys. Rev. C 82, 024320 (2010).
  23. M. Grasso et al., Int. J. Mod. Phys. E 18, 2009 (2009).
  24. A. Mutschler et al., Nat. Phys. 13, 152 (2017).
  25. J. M. Yao, H. Mei, and Z. P. Li, Phys. Lett. B 723, 459 (2013).
  26. M. Beiner and R. J. Lombard, Phys. Lett. B 47, 399 (1973).
  27. D. Vautherin and D. M. Brink, Phys. Rev. C 5, 626 (1972).
  28. P. Ring and P. Schuck, The Nuclear Many-Body Problem (Springer-Verlag, Berlin/Heidelberg, 2004).
  29. https://www-nds.iaea.org/RIPL-3/
  30. K. Langanke, J. A. Maruhn, and S. E. Koonin, Computational Nuclear Physics 1 (Springer-Verlag, Berlin/Heidelberg, 1990).
  31. G. Colo, L. Cao, N. V. Giai, and L. Capelli, Comput. Phys. Commun. 184, 142 (2013).
  32. J. Dobaczewski, W. Nazarewicz, and P.-G. Reinhard, Nucl. Phys. A 693, 361 (2001).
  33. A. Volya, B. A. Brown, and V. Zelevinsky, Phys. Lett. B 509, 37 (2001).
  34. V. Zelevinsky and A. Volya, Phys. At. Nucl. 66, 1781 (2003).
  35. A. Bohr and B. Mottelson, Nuclear Structure (Benjamin, New York, 1974), Vol. 2.
  36. D. M. Brink and R. A. Broglia, Nuclear Superfluidity (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2004).
  37. J. Bardeen, L. N. Cooper, and J. R. Schrieffer, Phys. Rev. 106, 162 (1957); 108, 1175 (1957).
  38. T. Alm, B. L. Friman, G. Ropke, and H. Schulz, Nucl. Phys. A 551, 45 (1993).
  39. E. Khan, N. Van Giai, and N. Sandulescu, Nucl. Phys. A 789, 94 (2007).
  40. N. Quang Hung and N. Dinh Dang, Phys. Rev. C 79, 054328 (2009).
  41. N. Dinh Dang and N. Quang Hung, Phys. Rev. C 77, 064315 (2008).
  42. L. G. Moretto, Phys. Lett. B 40, 1 (1972).
  43. A. L. Goodman, Nucl. Phys. A 352, 30 (1981).
  44. N. Dinh Dang, P. Ring, and R. Rossignoli, Phys. Rev. C 47, 606 (1993).
  45. N. Dinh Dang and A. Arima, Phys. Rev. C 68, 014318 (2003); N. Dinh Dang, ibid. 76, 064320 (2007).
  46. N. Quang Hung, N. Dinh Dang, and L. T. Quynh Huong, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 022502 (2017).
  47. O. Burglin and N. Rowley, Nucl. Phys. A 602, 21 (1996).
  48. H. Molique and J. Dudek, Phys. Rev. C 56, 1795 (1997).
  49. P. G. Reinhard, F. Grummer, and K. Goeke, Z. Phys. A 317, 339 (1984).
  50. M. Bender, K. Rutz, P.-G. Reinhard, and J. Maruhn, Eur. Phys. J. A 7, 467 (2000).
  51. M. Samyn et al., Nucl. Phys. A 700, 142 (2002).
  52. S. Goriely, M. Samyn, P.-H. Heenen, J. M. Pearson, and F. Tondeur, Phys. Rev. C 66, 024326 (2002).
  53. M. Samyn, S. Goriely, and J. M. Pearson, Nucl. Phys. A 725, 69 (2003).
  54. S. Goriely, M. Samyn, M. Bender, and J. M. Pearson, Phys. Rev. C 68, 054325 (2003).
  55. M. Samyn, S. Goriely, M. Bender, and J. M. Pearson, Phys. Rev. C 70, 044309 (2004).
  56. S. Goriely, M. Samyn, J. M. Pearson, and M. Onsi, Nucl. Phys. A 750, 425 (2005).
  57. S. Goriely, M. Samyn, and J. M. Pearson, Nucl. Phys. A 773, 279 (2006).
  58. S. Goriely, M. Samyn, and J. M. Pearson, Phys. Rev. C 75, 064312 (2007).
  59. S. Goriely and J. M. Pearson, Phys. Rev. C 77, 031301 (2008).
  60. N. Chamel, S. Goriely, and J. M. Pearson, Nucl. Phys. A 812, 72 (2008).
  61. S. Goriely, N. Chamel, and J. M. Pearson, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 152503 (2009).
  62. N. Chamel, S. Goriely, and J. M. Pearson, Phys. Rev. C 80, 065804 (2009).
  63. F. Tondeur, S. Goriely, J. M. Pearson, and M. Onsi, Phys. Rev. C 62, 024308 (2000).
  64. S. Goriely, M. Pearson, and F. Tondeur, Nucl. Phys. A 688, 349 (2001).
  65. P. Bonche, S. Levit, and D. Vautherin, Nucl. Phys. A 436, 265 (1985).
  66. A. N. Antonov, D. N. Kadrev, M. K. Gaidarov, P. Sarriguren, and E. M. de Guerra, Phys. Rev. C 95, 024314 (2017).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. C 97, 024331– Published 23 February, 2018
  • Received 12 December 2017
Crossmark - Check for updates button

©2018 American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation