scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Journal ArticleDOI

Modification of the nuclear landscape in the inverse problem framework using the generalized Bethe–Weizsäcker mass formula

01 Mar 2018-International Journal of Modern Physics E-nuclear Physics (World Scientific Publishing Company)-Vol. 27, Iss: 02, pp 1850015
TL;DR: In this paper, the nuclear mass problem is formalized in the inverse problem framework, which allows us to infer the underlying model parameters from experimental observation, rather than to predict the underlying models.
Abstract: We formalized the nuclear mass problem in the inverse problem framework. This approach allows us to infer the underlying model parameters from experimental observation, rather than to predict the o...
Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the Bethe-Weizsacker mass formula with five energy terms is revisited and updated, and a new set of energy coefficients of the mass formula is obtained, which is in very good agreement with the experimental data.

25 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: With reference to authors recently proposed three virtual atomic gravitational constants and nuclear elementary charge, close to stable mass numbers, it is shown that, squared neutron number plays a major role in reducing nuclear binding energy.
Abstract: With reference to authors recently proposed three virtual atomic gravitational constants and nuclear elementary charge, close to stable mass numbers, it is possible to show that, squared neutron number plays a major role in reducing nuclear binding energy. In this context, Z=30 onwards, ‘inverse of the strong coupling constant’, can be inferred as a representation of the maximum strength of nuclear interaction and 10.09 MeV can be considered as a characteristic nuclear binding energy coefficient. Coulombic energy coefficient being 0.695 MeV, semi empirical mass formula - volume, surface, asymmetric and pairing energy coefficients can be shown to be 15.29 MeV, 15.29 MeV, 23.16 MeV and 10.09 MeV respectively. Volume and Surface energy terms can be represented with (A-A2/3-1)*15.29 MeV. With reference to nuclear potential of 1.162 MeV and coulombic energy coefficient, close to stable mass numbers, nuclear binding energy can be fitted with two simple terms having an effective binding energy coefficient of [10.09-(1.162+0.695)/2] = 9.16 MeV. Nuclear binding energy can also be fitted with five terms having a single energy coefficient of 10.09 MeV. With further study, semi empirical mass formula can be simplified with respect to strong coupling constant.

10 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the effect of variation of these parameters is studied on fragmentation observables which are related to the nuclear liquid-gas phase transition, and the shift in transition temperature owing to the variation in liquid drop model parameters has been examined.
Abstract: The phenomenon of liquid-gas phase transition occurring in heavy-ion collisions at intermediate energies is a subject of contemporary interest. In statistical models of fragmentation, the liquid drop model is generally used to calculate the ground-state binding energies of the fragments. It is well known that the surface and symmetry energy of the hot fragments at the low-density freeze-out can be considerably modified. In addition to this, the level-density parameter also has a wide variation. The effect of variation of these parameters is studied on fragmentation observables which are related to the nuclear liquid-gas phase transition. The canonical thermodynamical model which has been very successful in describing the phenomenon of fragmentation is used for the study. The shift in transition temperature owing to the variation in liquid drop model parameters has been examined.

4 citations

Posted ContentDOI
30 Nov 2019
TL;DR: In this article, a semi-empirical relation between strong coupling constant and binding energy was proposed, with coefficients 0.00189 and 0.0642 connected with nuclear stability and bounding energy.
Abstract: As there exist no repulsive forces in strong interaction, in a hypothetical approach, strong interaction can be assumed to be equivalent to a large gravitational coupling. Based on this concept, strong coupling constant can be defined as a ratio of the electromagnetic force and the gravitational force associated with proton, neutron, up quark and down quark. With respect to the product of strong coupling constant and fine structure ratio, we review our recently proposed two semi empirical relations and coefficients 0.00189 and 0.00642 connected with nuclear stability and binding energy. We wish to emphasize thatby classifying nucleons as ‘free nucleons’ and ‘active nucleons’, nuclear binding energy can be fitted with a new class of ‘three term’ formula having one unique energy coefficient. Based on the geometry and quantum nature, currently believed harmonic oscillator and spin orbit magic numbers can be considered as the lower and upper “mass limits” of quark clusters.

3 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
04 Jan 2021-Universe
TL;DR: In this article, the authors studied the behavior of neutrino flavor oscillations in the binary-driven hypernova model of long gamma-ray bursts, where a carbon-oxygen star explodes as a supernova in the presence of a neutron star binary companion in close orbit.
Abstract: In the binary-driven hypernova model of long gamma-ray bursts, a carbon–oxygen star explodes as a supernova in the presence of a neutron star binary companion in close orbit. Hypercritical (i.e., highly super-Eddington) accretion of the ejecta matter onto the neutron star sets in, making it reach the critical mass with consequent formation of a Kerr black hole. We have recently shown that, during the accretion process onto the neutron star, fast neutrino flavor oscillations occur. Numerical simulations of the above system show that a part of the ejecta stays bound to the newborn Kerr black hole, leading to a new process of hypercritical accretion. We address herein, also for this phase of the binary-driven hypernova, the occurrence of neutrino flavor oscillations given the extreme conditions of high density (up to 1012 g cm−3) and temperatures (up to tens of MeV) inside this disk. We estimate the behavior of the electronic and non-electronic neutrino content within the two-flavor formalism (νeνx) under the action of neutrino collective effects by neutrino self-interactions. We find that in the case of inverted mass hierarchy, neutrino oscillations inside the disk have frequencies between ∼(105–109) s−1, leading the disk to achieve flavor equipartition. This implies that the energy deposition rate by neutrino annihilation (ν+ν¯→e−+e+) in the vicinity of the Kerr black hole is smaller than previous estimates in the literature not accounting for flavor oscillations inside the disk. The exact value of the reduction factor depends on the νe and νx optical depths but it can be as high as ∼5. The results of this work are a first step toward the analysis of neutrino oscillations in a novel astrophysical context, and as such, deserve further attention.

3 citations

References
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
Kaoru Hagiwara, Ken Ichi Hikasa1, Koji Nakamura, Masaharu Tanabashi1, M. Aguilar-Benitez, Claude Amsler2, R. M. Barnett3, P. R. Burchat4, C. D. Carone5, C. Caso6, G. Conforto7, Olav Dahl3, Michael Doser8, Semen Eidelman9, Jonathan L. Feng10, L. K. Gibbons11, M. C. Goodman12, Christoph Grab13, D. E. Groom3, Atul Gurtu8, Atul Gurtu14, K. G. Hayes15, J.J. Hernández-Rey16, K. Honscheid17, Christopher Kolda18, Michelangelo L. Mangano8, D. M. Manley19, Aneesh V. Manohar20, John March-Russell8, Alberto Masoni, Ramon Miquel3, Klaus Mönig, Hitoshi Murayama21, Hitoshi Murayama3, S. Sánchez Navas13, Keith A. Olive22, Luc Pape8, C. Patrignani6, A. Piepke23, Matts Roos24, John Terning25, Nils A. Tornqvist24, T. G. Trippe3, Petr Vogel26, C. G. Wohl3, Ron L. Workman27, W-M. Yao3, B. Armstrong3, P. S. Gee3, K. S. Lugovsky, S. B. Lugovsky, V. S. Lugovsky, Marina Artuso28, D. Asner29, K. S. Babu30, E. L. Barberio8, Marco Battaglia8, H. Bichsel31, O. Biebel32, P. Bloch8, Robert N. Cahn3, Ariella Cattai8, R.S. Chivukula33, R. Cousins34, G. A. Cowan35, Thibault Damour36, K. Desler, R. J. Donahue3, D. A. Edwards, Victor Daniel Elvira37, Jens Erler38, V. V. Ezhela, A Fassò8, W. Fetscher13, Brian D. Fields39, B. Foster40, Daniel Froidevaux8, Masataka Fukugita41, Thomas K. Gaisser42, L. A. Garren37, H J Gerber13, Frederick J. Gilman43, Howard E. Haber44, C. A. Hagmann29, J.L. Hewett4, Ian Hinchliffe3, Craig J. Hogan31, G. Höhler45, P. Igo-Kemenes46, John David Jackson3, Kurtis F Johnson47, D. Karlen48, B. Kayser37, S. R. Klein3, Konrad Kleinknecht49, I.G. Knowles50, P. Kreitz4, Yu V. Kuyanov, R. Landua8, Paul Langacker38, L. S. Littenberg51, Alan D. Martin52, Tatsuya Nakada8, Tatsuya Nakada53, Meenakshi Narain33, Paolo Nason, John A. Peacock54, H. R. Quinn55, Stuart Raby17, Georg G. Raffelt32, E. A. Razuvaev, B. Renk49, L. Rolandi8, Michael T Ronan3, L.J. Rosenberg54, C.T. Sachrajda55, A. I. Sanda56, Subir Sarkar57, Michael Schmitt58, O. Schneider53, Douglas Scott59, W. G. Seligman60, M. H. Shaevitz60, Torbjörn Sjöstrand61, George F. Smoot3, Stefan M Spanier4, H. Spieler3, N. J. C. Spooner62, Mark Srednicki63, Achim Stahl, Todor Stanev42, M. Suzuki3, N. P. Tkachenko, German Valencia64, K. van Bibber29, Manuella Vincter65, D. R. Ward66, Bryan R. Webber66, M R Whalley52, Lincoln Wolfenstein43, J. Womersley37, C. L. Woody51, Oleg Zenin 
Tohoku University1, University of Zurich2, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory3, Stanford University4, College of William & Mary5, University of Genoa6, University of Urbino7, CERN8, Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics9, University of California, Irvine10, Cornell University11, Argonne National Laboratory12, ETH Zurich13, Tata Institute of Fundamental Research14, Hillsdale College15, Spanish National Research Council16, Ohio State University17, University of Notre Dame18, Kent State University19, University of California, San Diego20, University of California, Berkeley21, University of Minnesota22, University of Alabama23, University of Helsinki24, Los Alamos National Laboratory25, California Institute of Technology26, George Washington University27, Syracuse University28, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory29, Oklahoma State University–Stillwater30, University of Washington31, Max Planck Society32, Boston University33, University of California, Los Angeles34, Royal Holloway, University of London35, Université Paris-Saclay36, Fermilab37, University of Pennsylvania38, University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign39, University of Bristol40, University of Tokyo41, University of Delaware42, Carnegie Mellon University43, University of California, Santa Cruz44, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology45, Heidelberg University46, Florida State University47, Carleton University48, University of Mainz49, University of Edinburgh50, Brookhaven National Laboratory51, Durham University52, University of Lausanne53, Massachusetts Institute of Technology54, University of Southampton55, Nagoya University56, University of Oxford57, Northwestern University58, University of British Columbia59, Columbia University60, Lund University61, University of Sheffield62, University of California, Santa Barbara63, Iowa State University64, University of Alberta65, University of Cambridge66
TL;DR: The Particle Data Group's biennial review as mentioned in this paper summarizes much of particle physics, using data from previous editions, plus 2658 new measurements from 644 papers, and lists, evaluates, and average measured properties of gauge bosons, leptons, quarks, mesons, and baryons.
Abstract: This biennial Review summarizes much of particle physics. Using data from previous editions, plus 2658 new measurements from 644 papers, we list, evaluate, and average measured properties of gauge bosons, leptons, quarks, mesons, and baryons. We summarize searches for hypothetical particles such as Higgs bosons, heavy neutrinos, and supersymmetric particles. All the particle properties and search limits are listed in Summary Tables. We also give numerous tables, figures, formulae, and reviews of topics such as the Standard Model, particle detectors, probability, and statistics. Among the 112 reviews are many that are new or heavily revised including those on Heavy-Quark and Soft-Collinear Effective Theory, Neutrino Cross Section Measurements, Monte Carlo Event Generators, Lattice QCD, Heavy Quarkonium Spectroscopy, Top Quark, Dark Matter, V-cb & V-ub, Quantum Chromodynamics, High-Energy Collider Parameters, Astrophysical Constants, Cosmological Parameters, and Dark Matter. A booklet is available containing the Summary Tables and abbreviated versions of some of the other sections of this full Review. All tables, listings, and reviews (and errata) are also available on the Particle Data Group website: http://pdg.lbl.gov.

4,465 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the nonlinear inverse problem for seismic reflection data is solved in the acoustic approximation, which is based on the generalized least squares criterion, and it can handle errors in the data set and a priori information on the model.
Abstract: The nonlinear inverse problem for seismic reflection data is solved in the acoustic approximation. The method is based on the generalized least‐squares criterion, and it can handle errors in the data set and a priori information on the model. Multiply reflected energy is naturally taken into account, as well as refracted energy or surface waves. The inverse problem can be solved using an iterative algorithm which gives, at each iteration, updated values of bulk modulus, density, and time source function. Each step of the iterative algorithm essentially consists of a forward propagation of the actual sources in the current model and a forward propagation (backward in time) of the data residuals. The correlation at each point of the space of the two fields thus obtained yields the corrections of the bulk modulus and density models. This shows, in particular, that the general solution of the inverse problem can be attained by methods strongly related to the methods of migration of unstacked data, and commerc...

3,198 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the atomic mass excesses and nuclear ground-state deformations of 8979 nuclei ranging from 16O to A = 339 were tabulated based on the finite-range droplet macroscopic model and the folded-Yukawa single-particle microscopic model.

2,919 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The second part of the new evaluation of atomic masses Ame 2003 is presented in this paper, where the results of a least squares calculation described in Part I for all accepted experimental data are derived here tables and graphs to replace those of 1993.

2,291 citations