DOCSLIB.ORG

Current Status of R -Process Nucleosynthesis

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Current Status of R -Process Nucleosynthesis Progress in Particle and Nuclear Physics 107 (2019) 109–166 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Progress in Particle and Nuclear Physics journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ppnp Review Current status of r-process nucleosynthesis ∗ T. Kajino a,b,c, W. Aoki a, A.B. Balantekin a,d, R. Diehl e,f, M.A. Famiano a,g, , G.J. Mathews a,h a National Astronomical Observatory of Japan, Mitaka, Tokyo, Japan b University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan c Beihang University, Beijing, China d University of Wisconsin, Madison 53706, USA e Max Planck Institut für Extraterrestrische Physik, Garching, Germany f Technical University of Munich, Germany g Western Michigan University, USA h University of Notre Dame, USA article info a b s t r a c t Article history: The rapid neutron capture process (r process) is believed to be responsible for about Available online 6 March 2019 half of the production of the elements heavier than iron and contributes to abundances Keywords: of some lighter nuclides as well. A universal pattern of r-process element abundances nucleosynthesis is observed in some metal-poor stars of the Galactic halo. This suggests that a well- r process regulated combination of astrophysical conditions and nuclear physics conspires to astrophysics theory produce such a universal abundance pattern. The search for the astrophysical site nuclear experiment for r-process nucleosynthesis has stimulated interdisciplinary research for more than astronomical observation six decades. There is currently much enthusiasm surrounding evidence for r-process nucleosynthesis in binary neutron star mergers in the multi-wavelength follow-up ob- servations of kilonova/gravitational-wave GRB170807A/GW170817. Nevertheless, there remain questions as to the contribution over the history of the Galaxy to the current solar-system r-process abundances from other sites such as neutrino-driven winds or magnetohydrodynamical ejection of material from core-collapse supernovae. In this review we highlight some current issues surrounding the nuclear physics input, as- tronomical observations, galactic chemical evolution, and theoretical simulations of r-process astrophysical environments with the goal of outlining a path toward resolving the remaining mysteries of the r process. ' 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. Contents 1. Introduction............................................................................................................................................................................................. 111 2. Nuclear theory ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 113 2.1. Theoretical neutron capture rates ........................................................................................................................................... 113 2.2. Theoretical nuclear masses....................................................................................................................................................... 113 2.3. Theoretical nuclear structure ................................................................................................................................................... 114 2.4. Theoretical β-decay rates ......................................................................................................................................................... 114 2.5. β-delayed neutron emission .................................................................................................................................................... 115 ∗ Corresponding author. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (T. Kajino), [email protected] (W. Aoki), [email protected] (A.B. Balantekin), [email protected] (R. Diehl), [email protected] (M.A. Famiano), [email protected] (G.J. Mathews). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ppnp.2019.02.008 0146-6410/' 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. 110 T. Kajino, W. Aoki, A.B. Balantekin et al. / Progress in Particle and Nuclear Physics 107 (2019) 109–166 2.6. Fission barriers and fission fragment distribution................................................................................................................. 115 2.7. Neutrino physics ........................................................................................................................................................................ 116 3. Experimental nuclear data .................................................................................................................................................................... 116 3.1. Nuclear masses........................................................................................................................................................................... 117 3.1.1. Mass measurement compilations and evaluations ................................................................................................ 117 3.1.2. Trap measurements ................................................................................................................................................... 118 3.1.3. TOF Measurements..................................................................................................................................................... 119 3.1.4. Storage rings ............................................................................................................................................................... 121 3.1.5. Other similar systems................................................................................................................................................ 123 3.2. β-decay rates and spectroscopy .............................................................................................................................................. 123 3.2.1. RIKEN ........................................................................................................................................................................... 123 3.2.2. CERN ISOLDE............................................................................................................................................................... 124 3.2.3. ANL/CARIBU ................................................................................................................................................................ 125 3.2.4. NSCL............................................................................................................................................................................. 125 3.2.5. GSI................................................................................................................................................................................ 125 3.2.6. Jyväskylä...................................................................................................................................................................... 126 3.2.7. ORNL ............................................................................................................................................................................ 126 3.2.8. Charge exchange ........................................................................................................................................................ 126 3.3. β-delayed neutron emission .................................................................................................................................................... 126 3.4. Fission barriers and distributions ............................................................................................................................................ 127 3.5. β-delayed fission ....................................................................................................................................................................... 127 3.6. Neutron capture rates ............................................................................................................................................................... 128 3.6.1. Direct Measurements................................................................................................................................................. 128 3.6.2. Surrogate Reactions.................................................................................................................................................... 128 3.6.3. Coulomb Dissociation ................................................................................................................................................ 128 3.6.4. β-Oslo Technique ....................................................................................................................................................... 129 3.6.5. Other facilities and techniques................................................................................................................................. 129 3.7. Nuclear structure studies.......................................................................................................................................................... 129 3.7.1. Neutron separation energies and shell closures..................................................................................................... 129 3.7.2. Isomers .......................................................................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Arxiv:Nucl-Th/0402046V1 13 Feb 2004
    The Shell Model as Unified View of Nuclear Structure E. Caurier,1, ∗ G. Mart´ınez-Pinedo,2,3, † F. Nowacki,1, ‡ A. Poves,4, § and A. P. Zuker1, ¶ 1Institut de Recherches Subatomiques, IN2P3-CNRS, Universit´eLouis Pasteur, F-67037 Strasbourg, France 2Institut d’Estudis Espacials de Catalunya, Edifici Nexus, Gran Capit`a2, E-08034 Barcelona, Spain 3Instituci´oCatalana de Recerca i Estudis Avan¸cats, Llu´ıs Companys 23, E-08010 Barcelona, Spain 4Departamento de F´ısica Te´orica, Universidad Aut´onoma, Cantoblanco, 28049, Madrid, Spain (Dated: October 23, 2018) The last decade has witnessed both quantitative and qualitative progresses in Shell Model stud- ies, which have resulted in remarkable gains in our understanding of the structure of the nucleus. Indeed, it is now possible to diagonalize matrices in determinantal spaces of dimensionality up to 109 using the Lanczos tridiagonal construction, whose formal and numerical aspects we will analyze. Besides, many new approximation methods have been developed in order to overcome the dimensionality limitations. Furthermore, new effective nucleon-nucleon interactions have been constructed that contain both two and three-body contributions. The former are derived from realistic potentials (i.e., consistent with two nucleon data). The latter incorporate the pure monopole terms necessary to correct the bad saturation and shell-formation properties of the real- istic two-body forces. This combination appears to solve a number of hitherto puzzling problems. In the present review we will concentrate on those results which illustrate the global features of the approach: the universality of the effective interaction and the capacity of the Shell Model to describe simultaneously all the manifestations of the nuclear dynamics either of single particle or collective nature.
    [Show full text]
  • The R-Process Nucleosynthesis and Related Challenges
    EPJ Web of Conferences 165, 01025 (2017) DOI: 10.1051/epjconf/201716501025 NPA8 2017 The r-process nucleosynthesis and related challenges Stephane Goriely1,, Andreas Bauswein2, Hans-Thomas Janka3, Oliver Just4, and Else Pllumbi3 1Institut d’Astronomie et d’Astrophysique, Université Libre de Bruxelles, CP 226, 1050 Brussels, Belgium 2Heidelberger Institut fr¨ Theoretische Studien, Schloss-Wolfsbrunnenweg 35, 69118 Heidelberg, Germany 3Max-Planck-Institut für Astrophysik, Postfach 1317, 85741 Garching, Germany 4Astrophysical Big Bang Laboratory, RIKEN, 2-1 Hirosawa, Wako, Saitama, 351-0198, Japan Abstract. The rapid neutron-capture process, or r-process, is known to be of fundamental importance for explaining the origin of approximately half of the A > 60 stable nuclei observed in nature. Recently, special attention has been paid to neutron star (NS) mergers following the confirmation by hydrodynamic simulations that a non-negligible amount of matter can be ejected and by nucleosynthesis calculations combined with the predicted astrophysical event rate that such a site can account for the majority of r-material in our Galaxy. We show here that the combined contribution of both the dynamical (prompt) ejecta expelled during binary NS or NS-black hole (BH) mergers and the neutrino and viscously driven outflows generated during the post-merger remnant evolution of relic BH-torus systems can lead to the production of r-process elements from mass number A > 90 up to actinides. The corresponding abundance distribution is found to reproduce the∼ solar distribution extremely well. It can also account for the elemental distributions observed in low-metallicity stars. However, major uncertainties still affect our under- standing of the composition of the ejected matter.
    [Show full text]
  • Photofission Cross Sections of 238U and 235U from 5.0 Mev to 8.0 Mev Robert Andrew Anderl Iowa State University
    Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Retrospective Theses and Dissertations Dissertations 1972 Photofission cross sections of 238U and 235U from 5.0 MeV to 8.0 MeV Robert Andrew Anderl Iowa State University Follow this and additional works at: https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/rtd Part of the Nuclear Commons, and the Oil, Gas, and Energy Commons Recommended Citation Anderl, Robert Andrew, "Photofission cross sections of 238U and 235U from 5.0 MeV to 8.0 MeV " (1972). Retrospective Theses and Dissertations. 4715. https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/rtd/4715 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Dissertations at Iowa State University Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Retrospective Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Iowa State University Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. INFORMATION TO USERS This dissertation was produced from a microfilm copy of the original document. While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the original submitted. The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand markings or patterns which may appear on this reproduction, 1. The sign or "target" for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is "Missing Page(s)". If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting thru an image and duplicating adjacent pages to insure you complete continuity, 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Electron Capture in Stars
    Electron capture in stars K Langanke1;2, G Mart´ınez-Pinedo1;2;3 and R.G.T. Zegers4;5;6 1GSI Helmholtzzentrum f¨urSchwerionenforschung, D-64291 Darmstadt, Germany 2Institut f¨urKernphysik (Theoriezentrum), Department of Physics, Technische Universit¨atDarmstadt, D-64298 Darmstadt, Germany 3Helmholtz Forschungsakademie Hessen f¨urFAIR, GSI Helmholtzzentrum f¨ur Schwerionenforschung, D-64291 Darmstadt, Germany 4 National Superconducting Cyclotron Laboratory, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan 48824, USA 5 Joint Institute for Nuclear Astrophysics: Center for the Evolution of the Elements, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan 48824, USA 6 Department of Physics and Astronomy, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan 48824, USA E-mail: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Abstract. Electron captures on nuclei play an essential role for the dynamics of several astrophysical objects, including core-collapse and thermonuclear supernovae, the crust of accreting neutron stars in binary systems and the final core evolution of intermediate mass stars. In these astrophysical objects, the capture occurs at finite temperatures and at densities at which the electrons form a degenerate relativistic electron gas. The capture rates can be derived in perturbation theory where allowed nuclear transitions (Gamow-Teller transitions) dominate, except at the higher temperatures achieved in core-collapse supernovae where also forbidden transitions contribute significantly to the rates. There has been decisive progress in recent years in measuring Gamow-Teller (GT) strength distributions using novel experimental techniques based on charge-exchange reactions. These measurements provide not only data for the GT distributions of ground states for many relevant nuclei, but also serve as valuable constraints for nuclear models which are needed to derive the capture rates for the arXiv:2009.01750v1 [nucl-th] 3 Sep 2020 many nuclei, for which no data exist yet.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Lecture Notes in Nuclear Structure Physics B. Alex Brown November
    1 Lecture Notes in Nuclear Structure Physics B. Alex Brown November 2005 National Superconducting Cyclotron Laboratory and Department of Physics and Astronomy Michigan State University, E. Lansing, MI 48824 CONTENTS 2 Contents 1 Nuclear masses 6 1.1 Masses and binding energies . 6 1.2 Q valuesandseparationenergies . 10 1.3 Theliquid-dropmodel .......................... 18 2 Rms charge radii 25 3 Charge densities and form factors 31 4 Overview of nuclear decays 40 4.1 Decaywidthsandlifetimes. 41 4.2 Alphaandclusterdecay ......................... 42 4.3 Betadecay................................. 51 4.3.1 BetadecayQvalues ....................... 52 4.3.2 Allowedbetadecay ........................ 53 4.3.3 Phase-space for allowed beta decay . 57 4.3.4 Weak-interaction coupling constants . 59 4.3.5 Doublebetadecay ........................ 59 4.4 Gammadecay............................... 61 4.4.1 Reduced transition probabilities for gamma decay . .... 62 4.4.2 Weisskopf units for gamma decay . 65 5 The Fermi gas model 68 6 Overview of the nuclear shell model 71 7 The one-body potential 77 7.1 Generalproperties ............................ 77 7.2 Theharmonic-oscillatorpotential . ... 79 7.3 Separation of intrinsic and center-of-mass motion . ....... 81 7.3.1 Thekineticenergy ........................ 81 7.3.2 Theharmonic-oscillator . 83 8 The Woods-Saxon potential 87 8.1 Generalform ............................... 87 8.2 Computer program for the Woods-Saxon potential . .... 91 8.2.1 Exampleforboundstates . 92 8.2.2 Changingthepotentialparameters . 93 8.2.3 Widthofanunboundstateresonance . 94 8.2.4 Width of an unbound state resonance at a fixed energy . 95 9 The general many-body problem for fermions 97 CONTENTS 3 10 Conserved quantum numbers 101 10.1 Angularmomentum. 101 10.2Parity ..................................
    [Show full text]
  • Star Factories: Nuclear Fusion and the Creation of the Elements
    Star Factories: Nuclear Fusion and the Creation of the Elements Science In the River City workshop 3/22/11 Chris Taylor Department of Physics and Astronomy Sacramento State Introductions! Science Content Standards, Grades 9 - 12 Earth Sciences: Earth's Place in the Universe 1.e ''Students know the Sun is a typical star and is powered by nuclear reactions, primarily the fusion of hydrogen to form helium.'' 2.c '' Students know the evidence indicating that all elements with an atomic number greater than that of lithium have been formed by nuclear fusion in stars.'' Three topics tonight: 1) how do we know all the heavier elements are made in stars? (Big Bang theory) 2) How do stars make elements as heavy as or less heavy than iron? (Stellar nucleosynthesis) 3) How do stars make elements heavier than iron? (Supernovae) Big Bang Nucleosynthesis The Big Bang theory predicts that when the universe first formed, the only matter that existed was hydrogen, helium, and very tiny amounts of lithium. If this is true, then all other elements must have been created in stars. Astronomers use spectroscopy to examine the light emitted by distant stars to determine what kinds of atoms are in them. We've learned that most stars contain nearly every element in the periodic table. The spectrum of the Sun In order to measure measure what kinds of atoms were around in the earliest days of the Universe, we look for stars that were made out of fresh, primordial gas. The closest we can get to this is looking at dwarf galaxies, which show extremely low levels of elements heavier than helium.
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:1901.01410V3 [Astro-Ph.HE] 1 Feb 2021 Mental Information Is Available, and One Has to Rely Strongly on Theoretical Predictions for Nuclear Properties
    Origin of the heaviest elements: The rapid neutron-capture process John J. Cowan∗ HLD Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Oklahoma, 440 W. Brooks St., Norman, OK 73019, USA Christopher Snedeny Department of Astronomy, University of Texas, 2515 Speedway, Austin, TX 78712-1205, USA James E. Lawlerz Physics Department, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1150 University Avenue, Madison, WI 53706-1390, USA Ani Aprahamianx and Michael Wiescher{ Department of Physics and Joint Institute for Nuclear Astrophysics, University of Notre Dame, 225 Nieuwland Science Hall, Notre Dame, IN 46556, USA Karlheinz Langanke∗∗ GSI Helmholtzzentrum f¨urSchwerionenforschung, Planckstraße 1, 64291 Darmstadt, Germany and Institut f¨urKernphysik (Theoriezentrum), Fachbereich Physik, Technische Universit¨atDarmstadt, Schlossgartenstraße 2, 64298 Darmstadt, Germany Gabriel Mart´ınez-Pinedoyy GSI Helmholtzzentrum f¨urSchwerionenforschung, Planckstraße 1, 64291 Darmstadt, Germany; Institut f¨urKernphysik (Theoriezentrum), Fachbereich Physik, Technische Universit¨atDarmstadt, Schlossgartenstraße 2, 64298 Darmstadt, Germany; and Helmholtz Forschungsakademie Hessen f¨urFAIR, GSI Helmholtzzentrum f¨urSchwerionenforschung, Planckstraße 1, 64291 Darmstadt, Germany Friedrich-Karl Thielemannzz Department of Physics, University of Basel, Klingelbergstrasse 82, 4056 Basel, Switzerland and GSI Helmholtzzentrum f¨urSchwerionenforschung, Planckstraße 1, 64291 Darmstadt, Germany (Dated: February 2, 2021) The production of about half of the heavy elements found in nature is assigned to a spe- cific astrophysical nucleosynthesis process: the rapid neutron capture process (r-process). Although this idea has been postulated more than six decades ago, the full understand- ing faces two types of uncertainties/open questions: (a) The nucleosynthesis path in the nuclear chart runs close to the neutron-drip line, where presently only limited experi- arXiv:1901.01410v3 [astro-ph.HE] 1 Feb 2021 mental information is available, and one has to rely strongly on theoretical predictions for nuclear properties.
    [Show full text]
  • Heavy Element Nucleosynthesis
    Heavy Element Nucleosynthesis A summary of the nucleosynthesis of light elements is as follows 4He Hydrogen burning 3He Incomplete PP chain (H burning) 2H, Li, Be, B Non-thermal processes (spallation) 14N, 13C, 15N, 17O CNO processing 12C, 16O Helium burning 18O, 22Ne α captures on 14N (He burning) 20Ne, Na, Mg, Al, 28Si Partly from carbon burning Mg, Al, Si, P, S Partly from oxygen burning Ar, Ca, Ti, Cr, Fe, Ni Partly from silicon burning Isotopes heavier than iron (as well as some intermediate weight iso- topes) are made through neutron captures. Recall that the prob- ability for a non-resonant reaction contained two components: an exponential reflective of the quantum tunneling needed to overcome electrostatic repulsion, and an inverse energy dependence arising from the de Broglie wavelength of the particles. For neutron cap- tures, there is no electrostatic repulsion, and, in complex nuclei, virtually all particle encounters involve resonances. As a result, neutron capture cross-sections are large, and are very nearly inde- pendent of energy. To appreciate how heavy elements can be built up, we must first consider the lifetime of an isotope against neutron capture. If the cross-section for neutron capture is independent of energy, then the lifetime of the species will be ( )1=2 1 1 1 µn τn = ≈ = Nnhσvi NnhσivT Nnhσi 2kT For a typical neutron cross-section of hσi ∼ 10−25 cm2 and a tem- 8 9 perature of 5 × 10 K, τn ∼ 10 =Nn years. Next consider the stability of a neutron rich isotope. If the ratio of of neutrons to protons in an atomic nucleus becomes too large, the nucleus becomes unstable to beta-decay, and a neutron is changed into a proton via − (Z; A+1) −! (Z+1;A+1) + e +ν ¯e (27:1) The timescale for this decay is typically on the order of hours, or ∼ 10−3 years (with a factor of ∼ 103 scatter).
    [Show full text]
  • Sensitivity of Type Ia Supernovae to Electron Capture Rates E
    A&A 624, A139 (2019) Astronomy https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/201935095 & c ESO 2019 Astrophysics Sensitivity of Type Ia supernovae to electron capture rates E. Bravo E.T.S. Arquitectura del Vallès, Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya, Carrer Pere Serra 1-15, 08173 Sant Cugat del Vallès, Spain e-mail: [email protected] Received 22 January 2019 / Accepted 8 March 2019 ABSTRACT The thermonuclear explosion of massive white dwarfs is believed to explain at least a fraction of Type Ia supernovae (SNIa). After thermal runaway, electron captures on the ashes left behind by the burning front determine a loss of pressure, which impacts the dynamics of the explosion and the neutron excess of matter. Indeed, overproduction of neutron-rich species such as 54Cr has been deemed a problem of Chandrasekhar-mass models of SNIa for a long time. I present the results of a sensitivity study of SNIa models to the rates of weak interactions, which have been incorporated directly into the hydrodynamic explosion code. The weak rates have been scaled up or down by a factor ten, either globally for a common bibliographical source, or individually for selected isotopes. In line with previous works, the impact of weak rates uncertainties on sub-Chandrasekhar models of SNIa is almost negligible. The impact on the dynamics of Chandrasekhar-mass models and on the yield of 56Ni is also scarce. The strongest effect is found on the nucleosynthesis of neutron-rich nuclei, such as 48Ca, 54Cr, 58Fe, and 64Ni. The species with the highest influence on nucleosynthesis do not coincide with the isotopes that contribute most to the neutronization of matter.
    [Show full text]
  • 14. Structure of Nuclei Particle and Nuclear Physics
    14. Structure of Nuclei Particle and Nuclear Physics Dr. Tina Potter Dr. Tina Potter 14. Structure of Nuclei 1 In this section... Magic Numbers The Nuclear Shell Model Excited States Dr. Tina Potter 14. Structure of Nuclei 2 Magic Numbers Magic Numbers = 2; 8; 20; 28; 50; 82; 126... Nuclei with a magic number of Z and/or N are particularly stable, e.g. Binding energy per nucleon is large for magic numbers Doubly magic nuclei are especially stable. Dr. Tina Potter 14. Structure of Nuclei 3 Magic Numbers Other notable behaviour includes Greater abundance of isotopes and isotones for magic numbers e.g. Z = 20 has6 stable isotopes (average=2) Z = 50 has 10 stable isotopes (average=4) Odd A nuclei have small quadrupole moments when magic First excited states for magic nuclei higher than neighbours Large energy release in α, β decay when the daughter nucleus is magic Spontaneous neutron emitters have N = magic + 1 Nuclear radius shows only small change with Z, N at magic numbers. etc... etc... Dr. Tina Potter 14. Structure of Nuclei 4 Magic Numbers Analogy with atomic behaviour as electron shells fill. Atomic case - reminder Electrons move independently in central potential V (r) ∼ 1=r (Coulomb field of nucleus). Shells filled progressively according to Pauli exclusion principle. Chemical properties of an atom defined by valence (unpaired) electrons. Energy levels can be obtained (to first order) by solving Schr¨odinger equation for central potential. 1 E = n = principle quantum number n n2 Shell closure gives noble gas atoms. Are magic nuclei analogous to the noble gas atoms? Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:2008.04340V2 [Astro-Ph.HE] 7 Dec 2020
    SLAC-PUB-17548 Exciting Prospects for Detecting Late-Time Neutrinos from Core-Collapse Supernovae Shirley Weishi Li,1, 2, 3, ∗ Luke F. Roberts,4, y and John F. Beacom1, 2, 5, z 1Center for Cosmology and AstroParticle Physics (CCAPP), Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210 2Department of Physics, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210 3SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory, Menlo Park, CA, 94025 4National Superconducting Cyclotron Laboratory and Department of Physics and Astronomy, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824 5Department of Astronomy, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210 (Dated: December 7, 2020) The importance of detecting neutrinos from a Milky Way core-collapse supernova is well known. An under-studied phase is proto-neutron star cooling. For SN 1987A, this seemingly began at about 2 s, and is thus probed by only 6 of the 19 events (and only theν ¯e flavor) in the Kamiokande-II and IMB detectors. With the higher statistics expected for present and near-future detectors, it should be possible to measure detailed neutrino signals out to very late times. We present the first comprehensive study of neutrino detection during the proto-neutron star cooling phase, considering a variety of outcomes, using all flavors, and employing detailed detector physics. For our nominal model, the event yields (at 10 kpc) after 10 s|the approximate duration of the SN 1987A signal| far exceed the entire SN 1987A yield, with '250ν ¯e events (to 50 s) in Super-Kamiokande, '110 νe events (to 40 s) in DUNE, and '10 νµ; ντ ; ν¯µ; ν¯τ events (to 20 s) in JUNO.
    [Show full text]
  • Production and Properties Towards the Island of Stability
    This is an electronic reprint of the original article. This reprint may differ from the original in pagination and typographic detail. Author(s): Leino, Matti Title: Production and properties towards the island of stability Year: 2016 Version: Please cite the original version: Leino, M. (2016). Production and properties towards the island of stability. In D. Rudolph (Ed.), Nobel Symposium NS 160 - Chemistry and Physics of Heavy and Superheavy Elements (Article 01002). EDP Sciences. EPJ Web of Conferences, 131. https://doi.org/10.1051/epjconf/201613101002 All material supplied via JYX is protected by copyright and other intellectual property rights, and duplication or sale of all or part of any of the repository collections is not permitted, except that material may be duplicated by you for your research use or educational purposes in electronic or print form. You must obtain permission for any other use. Electronic or print copies may not be offered, whether for sale or otherwise to anyone who is not an authorised user. EPJ Web of Conferences 131, 01002 (2016) DOI: 10.1051/epjconf/201613101002 Nobel Symposium NS160 – Chemistry and Physics of Heavy and Superheavy Elements Production and properties towards the island of stability Matti Leino Department of Physics, University of Jyväskylä, PO Box 35, 40014 University of Jyväskylä, Finland Abstract. The structure of the nuclei of the heaviest elements is discussed with emphasis on single-particle properties as determined by decay and in- beam spectroscopy. The basic features of production of these nuclei using fusion evaporation reactions will also be discussed. 1. Introduction In this short review, some examples of nuclear structure physics and experimental methods relevant for the study of the heaviest elements will be presented.
    [Show full text]