Nuclear Data Sheets for A = 104

Low-energy structure of the even-ARu96−104isotopes viaTaylor1, Gürdal2, Kumbartzki3 et al. 2011Phys. Rev. C

“…The current literature values for the g(2 + 1 ; 98,100,102,104 Ru) [11][12][13][14] (see Fig. 1(a)) are consistent, within their somewhat large associated uncertainties (∼ 75% for 98 Ru), with each other and with the predictions of the hydrodynamical model (g = Z/A), suggesting a possible collective nature for the 2 + 1 states.…”

“…1(a)) are consistent, within their somewhat large associated uncertainties (∼ 75% for 98 Ru), with each other and with the predictions of the hydrodynamical model (g = Z/A), suggesting a possible collective nature for the 2 + 1 states. This almost constant trend of the g-factor data is not, however, observed in either the energies of the 2 + 1 states [11][12][13][14][15] (Fig. 1(b)), which show a steady decrease with N , or in the B(E2:0 + 1 → 2 + 1 ) values [12,[15][16][17] (Fig.…”

New lifetime measurements inPd109and the onset of deformation atN=60

“…A shape change to large deformation is also evident in the band structure of the odd-mass Pd isotopes [41][42][43][44][45][46][47][48] (Fig. 5) and suggested by B(E2) systematics [21,[55][56][57][58][59]. Yet, Stefanova et al [48] have recently suggested a transition to γ-softness beyond N =61 which may be maximal at 109 Pd 63 and 111 Pd 65 .…”

Alternative solvable description of the E(5) critical point symmetry in the interacting boson model

“…108 Pd, and 114,116 Cd, where "-" denotes either that the corresponding B(E2) value was not determined experimentally, or that the theoretical value was not provided in [9], the experimental data of 104 Ru were taken from [32][33][34], those of 108 Pd were taken from [35], those of 114 Cd were taken from [36], and those of 116 Cd were taken from [37,38], CQ N denotes the consistent-Q description at the critical point with N bosons. E(5) 104 Ru EXT SET 108 Pd EXT SET 116 Cd EXT SET CQ 8 114 Cd EXT SET CQ 9 0 + 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 + 1 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 …”

“…Therefore, one can not derive the energy surface described by (20) in the classical limit using (34) or using the method proposed in [27] directly. Moreover, since the quantum number of the angular momentum is also not a good quantum number in (34), the coherent state (34) may be expanded in terms of any complete set of U(6) ⊃ U(5) ⊃ O(5) basis vectors for given N. Due to the multiplicity occurring in the O(5) ↓ O(3) reduction, we expand (34) …”