Inelastic proton excitation of high-lying giant resonances

Adams, G. S.; Carey, T. A.; McClelland, J. B.; Moss, J. M.; Seestrom-Morris, S. J.; Cook, David A.

doi:10.1103/physrevc.33.2054

Cited by 29 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The mode is viewed as a compression wave in a definite direction and so is related to the nuclear incompressibility [16,19]. The isoscalar (T=0) TM and CM were observed in (α, α ′ )-reaction as broad low-energy (TM dominated) and high-energy (CM dominated) electric dipole distributions [14,18,[20][21][22][23][24][25]. The TM was also investigated in the region of the pygmy resonance in 208 Pb in a nuclear fluorescence experiment [26].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

General treatment of vortical, toroidal, and compression modes

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The multipole vortical, toroidal, and compression modes are analyzed. Following the vorticity concept of Ravenhall and Wambach, the vortical operator is derived and related in a simple way to the toroidal and compression operators. The strength functions and velocity fields of the modes are analyzed in 208 Pb within the random-phase-approximation using the Skyrme force SLy6. Both convection and magnetization nuclear currents are taken into account. It is shown that the isoscalar (isovector) vortical and toroidal modes are dominated by the convection (magnetization) nuclear current while the compression mode is fully convective. The relation between the above concept of the vorticity to the hydrodynamical vorticity is briefly discussed.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

General treatment of vortical, toroidal, and compression modes

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although measurements of the giant monopole resonance [10,11] and the isoscalar giant dipole resonance [12][13][14] have existed for some time, the field has seen a revitalization due to new and improved measurements of both compressional modes [15][16][17]. The field has also seen significant advances in the theoretical domain.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Self-consistent description of nuclear compressional modes

Piekarewicz

2001

Phys. Rev. C

106

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Isoscalar monopole and dipole compressional modes are computed for a variety of closed-shell nuclei in a relativistic random-phase approximation to three different parametrizations of the Walecka model with scalar self-interactions. Particular emphasis is placed on the role of self-consistency which by itself, and with little else, guarantees the decoupling of the spurious isoscalar-dipole strength from the physical response and the conservation of the vector current. A powerful new relation is introduced to quantify the violation of the vector current in terms of various ground-state form-factors. For the isoscalar-dipole mode two distinct regions are clearly identified: (i) a high-energy component that is sensitive to the size of the nucleus and scales with the compressibility of the model and (ii) a low-energy component that is insensitivity to the nuclear compressibility. A fairly good description of both compressional modes is obtained by using a "soft" parametrization having a compression modulus of K = 224 MeV.

show abstract

“…where ε F , m, and r 2 are the Fermi energy, nucleon mass, and mean square radius, respectively. Initial indications of the excitation of the ISGDR were reported as early as the beginning of the 1980s [4][5][6]. However, the first direct evidence for this mode, based on the differences in angular distribution of the ISGDR from that of the nearby highenergy octupole resonance (HEOR), was provided by Davis et al [7], who demonstrated that in 200 MeV inelastic α-scattering near 0 • , the giant resonance "bump" at 3hω excitation energy could be separated into two components, with the higher-energy component corresponding to the ISGDR.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The problem arose when one compared the available ISGDR data with the theoretical centroids of the ISGDR, calculated using the same interactions that appear to reproduce the available ISGMR data well [11][12][13][14][15][16]. The experimental centroids reported by Clark et al [8] were significantly lower than the calculated centroids; for example, in 208 Pb, Clark et al reported the ISGDR centroid at 19.9 ± 0.8 MeV lower than previous experimental results [4][5][6][7] and also lower than theoretical values of E x > 22 MeV. The low values for the centroids in the data of Clark et al evidently resulted from their background-subtraction procedure which rendered the ISGDR strength zero at E x > 24 MeV.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Isoscalar giant dipole resonance in 208Pb via inelastic α scattering at 400 MeV and nuclear incompressibility

et al. 2003

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The isoscalar giant dipole resonance (ISGDR) in 208 Pb has been investigated with inelastic α-scattering of 400 MeV at extremely forward angles, including 0 •. Energy spectra, virtually free from instrumental background, have been obtained and the ISGDR strength distribution has been extracted using a multipole-decomposition analysis (MDA). A difference-of-spectra approach yields the same ISGDR centroid energy as with MDA. These results lead to a value for nuclear incompressibility that is consistent for both the isoscalar dipole and monopole modes.

show abstract

Inelastic proton excitation of high-lying giant resonances

Cited by 29 publications

References 20 publications

General treatment of vortical, toroidal, and compression modes

General treatment of vortical, toroidal, and compression modes

Self-consistent description of nuclear compressional modes

Isoscalar giant dipole resonance in 208Pb via inelastic α scattering at 400 MeV and nuclear incompressibility

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About