Explorations Far from Stability

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Explorations Far from Stability Explorations Far From Stability Nowadays various criteria are used in evaluating the various fields of research which compete for scarce funds. Probably Alvin Weinberg, in his Minerva article in 1963, was the first person to articulate a set of criteria for scientific choice. Prior to that time, and perhaps by many even at that time, no such articulation was deemed necessary. Since Weinberg's article appeared there has been some evolution and elaboration in this area, but the criteria are still usually broken down into the so-called intrinsic and extrinsic categories; and, where possible, some idea of the impact on society is included. The intrinsic criteria deal with the importance of the area under discussion to the science itself and to such factors as its ripeness for development, whereas the extrinsic look outward to see the immediate or eventual impact the field may have on other areas of science and/or technology. It would naturally be of interest to apply these criteria to the newly de­ veloping area of nuclear explorations far from the line of beta stability. First of all we should mention the two major conferences which have been held on thinubject. The 1966 Lysekil Conference1 on Why and How Should We Investigate Nuclides Far Off the Stability Line? turned out to be more prophetic than even such a bold title at first implied. In addition to providing a forum for the pioneers high on the walls of the valley of stability, the Conference also provided some of the earliest discussion of the superheavy elements-the island of stability around element 114. V. M. Strutinski presented his now famous method for combining the liquid drop and single particle models for the calculation of the energy of the nucleus as a function of deformation, and he gave some results for various elements including 112 and 116. H. Meldner presented the first calculation indicating that 298 114 would be the center of the new island, and Torb Sikkeland gave an excellent discussion of the types of heavy ion reactions that might be used to produce superheavy elements. In 1966, then, the discussions showed the strong possibilities for expanding considerably the horizons of nuclear physics. The succeeding conference, held at Leysin, Switzerland2 in 1970, reinforced in all respects the importance given these new areas at the Lysekil Conference. From the point of view of intrinsic criteria, the interest associated with studies far from the line of beta stability is indeed great because phenomena CONAPP A 95 can be studied there that cannot be studied anywhere else. Furthermore, from an experimental as well as a theoretical point of view, the field is obviously ripe for development. The theorist, R. A. Sorenson, has pointed out the importance of studying nuclei along the N = Z line, which is only possible (except for the lightest nuclei) far from stability. Along the N = Z line the neutrons and protons fill corresponding energy levels so that their single particle wave functions have the maximum opportunity for overlap. There is correspondingly a maximum opportunity for the study of neutron-proton correlation effects. A number of phenomena including beta decay and deformation effects should be better studied along the N = Z line than near stability where the neutron excess masks the relationship between the proton and the neutron seen when they are equal in number. Sorenson has also pointed out the value of discovering more doubly magic nuclei such as 1 ~~Sn. Such nuclei far from stability would afford an oppor­ tunity to study radioactive decay that the doubly magic nuclei in the valley naturally cannot give. Since the orderings and spacings of neutron and proton levels are difficult to calculate as a function of N and Z, only approximate values of new magic numbers are now available. So the experimentalists will have to ultimately search them out. Another central question involves the validity far from stability of the various currently accepted mass formulas. In practice these mass formulas are, of necessity, semiempirical. That is to say, they are based on some theoretical model, but they contain adjustable parameters obtained by experiment. Since most of the experiments so far have been near stability, the validity of the parameters and shell corrections far from stability, where they are sometimes needed, is questionable. Indeed, as we shall see, some illuminating results have just recently been obtained in this regard. The important phenomena to be studied far from stability include neutron-proton correlation energy and the effects on shell corrections and magic numbers of nuclear deformation. The recent results of K. S. Toth and R. L. Hahn3 and their coworkers illustrate the richness of this area. These investigators have been studying alpha emitters far from the line of stability with atomic numbers ranging from 67 to 76 such as 156Yb, 159Hf, and 1690s. These nuclei are produced by bombarding suitable targets with heavy ions. Some of their product nuclei are located 19 to 21 mass units away from the line of stability. The rather extensive results obtained have enabled Toth and Hahn to see the large effects of the N = 82 magic number, neutron pairing effects in the N = 86 to 88 region, and to obtain an experimental check of various mass equations far from stability'. The Kelson-Garvey mass formula, so good near stability, was found to give poor results, for example. 96 The predictions of stability for the superheavy elements rest largely on the validity of the mass equation of Strutinsky which features his prescription for applying shell corrections to the liquid drop model. According to the various calculations, the superheavies will occur around Z = 114 and N = 184. The parameters employed naturally influence the results strongly, however. So the extent of the island of stability in terms of N and Z (as well as its very existence) awaits experimental exploration. The highlights we have hit illustrate the scientific interest in nuclei far from stability, and now we will look at how they are to be produced. Spallation reactions from high energy protons produce a broad mixture of products on the neutron deficient side. These high energy protons can also produce mixtures of products on the neutron rich side by high energy fission. Important work has already been done in this area at accelerators such as CERN in Geneva and the AGS at Brookhaven. The LAMPF at Los Alamos will have an 800 MeV one milliampere proton beam so that this type of research will soon receive a big boost. The fact that mixtures of isotopes are produced has prompted a large effort at CERN in the development of an on-line mass separation system. This highly successful system has enabled the investigators 116 there to study such isotopes far from the stability line as Xe(T112 = 55 sec), 115 118 117 Xe(T112 = 19 sec), Cs(T112 = 16 sec), and Cs(T112 = 8 sec). The Los Alamos facility will also have an on-line mass separator. Heavy ion accelerators are also most useful in exploring the walls of the valley, and they are thought to also represent the only reasonable way to reach the superheavy island of stability. Heavy ions produce fission and spallation, but they also engage in multinucleon transfer reactions and com­ pound nucleus reactions giving specific products. For example, transfer reactions have enabled A. G. Artukh and his coworkers to produce many neutron rich isotopes of C, N, 0, and F. A typical reaction would involve a 232Th target being bombarded by an 180 beam with up to four neutrons being transferred to the projectile and up to four protons being transferred to the target. Again the need for mass separation on-line is obvious and Dubna has such a system. Also the ALICE accelerator at Orsay has a highly success­ ful system. The heavy ion isochronous cyclotron at Oak Ridge is currently being fitted with an on-line mass separator as well, and such a system will also be used at the Berkeley Super HILAC. For studies on the neutron rich side, mass separators have also been installed on-line at several reactors including the ones at Ames, Iowa (U.S.A.) and Studsvik (Sweden). It is therefore clear that on-line mass separation, a "must" for serious study in this field, is well underway as a frontier of techno­ logical development. Another area of intrinsic interest to nuclear physicists involves heavy ion reactions. The study of nuclei far from stability, perhaps most particularly CONAPP A2 97 the production of the superheavy elements, will almost certainly require new understandings of the mechanisms of heavy ion reactions. At present the interplay of the various important effects is relatively unknown because high energy ions beyond argon have only become available with the krypton beam at Orsay and the xenon beam at Dubna in the last year or so. Even in the region between neon and argon few studies have been made. The develop­ ment of the tandem cyclotrons at Dubna, the Super HILAC at Berkeley, the UNILAC at Darmstadt and ALICE at Orsay will alter this picture drastically over the next few years. Indeed, the Super HILAC and the UNILAC will offer a particularly flexible approach since they will have sufficient energy to put any ion up to uranium over the Coulomb barrier of any element. Although we have only hit some of the high points, it appears clear that there is plenty of inherent interest for the nuclear physicist in the regions far from stability, and it is also clear that the means for carrying out such studies are at hand. So the field is ripe for development.
Recommended publications
  • An Octad for Darmstadtium and Excitement for Copernicium
    SYNOPSIS An Octad for Darmstadtium and Excitement for Copernicium The discovery that copernicium can decay into a new isotope of darmstadtium and the observation of a previously unseen excited state of copernicium provide clues to the location of the “island of stability.” By Katherine Wright holy grail of nuclear physics is to understand the stability uncover its position. of the periodic table’s heaviest elements. The problem Ais, these elements only exist in the lab and are hard to The team made their discoveries while studying the decay of make. In an experiment at the GSI Helmholtz Center for Heavy isotopes of flerovium, which they created by hitting a plutonium Ion Research in Germany, researchers have now observed a target with calcium ions. In their experiments, flerovium-288 previously unseen isotope of the heavy element darmstadtium (Z = 114, N = 174) decayed first into copernicium-284 and measured the decay of an excited state of an isotope of (Z = 112, N = 172) and then into darmstadtium-280 (Z = 110, another heavy element, copernicium [1]. The results could N = 170), a previously unseen isotope. They also measured an provide “anchor points” for theories that predict the stability of excited state of copernicium-282, another isotope of these heavy elements, says Anton Såmark-Roth, of Lund copernicium. Copernicium-282 is interesting because it University in Sweden, who helped conduct the experiments. contains an even number of protons and neutrons, and researchers had not previously measured an excited state of a A nuclide’s stability depends on how many protons (Z) and superheavy even-even nucleus, Såmark-Roth says.
    [Show full text]
  • Spallation Neutron Sources for Science and Technology
    Proceedings of the 8th Conference on Nuclear and Particle Physics, 20-24 Nov. 2011, Hurghada, Egypt SPALLATION NEUTRON SOURCES FOR SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY M.N.H. Comsan Nuclear Research Center, Atomic Energy Authority, Egypt Spallation Neutron Facilities Increasing interest has been noticed in spallation neutron sources (SNS) during the past 20 years. The system includes high current proton accelerator in the GeV region and spallation heavy metal target in the Hg-Bi region. Among high flux currently operating SNSs are: ISIS in UK (1985), SINQ in Switzerland (1996), JSNS in Japan (2008), and SNS in USA (2010). Under construction is the European spallation source (ESS) in Sweden (to be operational in 2020). The intense neutron beams provided by SNSs have the advantage of being of non-reactor origin, are of continuous (SINQ) or pulsed nature. Combined with state-of-the-art neutron instrumentation, they have a diverse potential for both scientific research and diverse applications. Why Neutrons? Neutrons have wavelengths comparable to interatomic spacings (1-5 Å) Neutrons have energies comparable to structural and magnetic excitations (1-100 meV) Neutrons are deeply penetrating (bulk samples can be studied) Neutrons are scattered with a strength that varies from element to element (and isotope to isotope) Neutrons have a magnetic moment (study of magnetic materials) Neutrons interact only weakly with matter (theory is easy) Neutron scattering is therefore an ideal probe of magnetic and atomic structures and excitations Neutron Producing Reactions
    [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]
  • Fusion and Spallation Irradiation Conditions Steven J
    Fusion and Spallation Irradiation Conditions Steven J. Zinkle Metals and Ceramics Division Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN International Workshop on Advanced Computational Science: Application to Fusion and Generation-IV Fission Reactors Washington DC, March 31-April 2, 2004 Comparison of fission and fusion (ITER) neutron spectra Stoller & Greenwood, JNM 271-272 (1999) 57 • Main difference between fission and DT fusion neutron spectra is the presence of significant flux above ~4 MeV for fusion –High energy neutrons typically cause enhanced production of numerous transmutation products including H and He –The Primary Knock-on Atom (PKA) spectra are similar for fission and fusion at low energies; fusion contains significant high-energy PKAs (>100 keV) Displacement Damage Mechanisms are being investigated with Molecular Dynamics Simulations Damage efficiency saturates when subcascade formation occurs Avg. Avg. fission fusion Molecular dynamics modeling of displacement cascades up to 50 keV PKA 200 keV and low-dose experimental tests (microstructure, tensile (ave. fusion) properties, etc.) indicates that defect production from fusion and fission neutron collisions are similar 10 keV PKA => Defect source term is similar for fission and fusion conditions (ave. fission) Peak damage state in iron cascades at 100K 5 nm A critical unanswered question is the effect of higher transmutant H and He production in the fusion spectrum Radiation Damage can Produce Large Changes in Structural Materials • Radiation hardening and embrittlement
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Chapter 16 Stable and Radioactive Isotopes Jim Murray 5/7/01 Univ
    Chapter 16 Stable and Radioactive Isotopes Jim Murray 5/7/01 Univ. Washington Each atomic element (defined by its number of protons) comes in different flavors, depending on the number of neutrons. Most elements in the periodic table exist in more than one isotope. Some are stable and some are radioactive. Scientists have tallied more than 3600 isotopes, the majority are radioactive. The Isotopes Project at Lawrence Berkeley National Lab in California has a web site (http://ie.lbl.gov/toi.htm) that gives detailed information about all the isotopes. Stable and radioactive isotopes are the most useful class of tracers available to geochemists. In almost all cases the distributions of these isotopes have been used to study oceanographic processes controlling the distributions of the elements. Radioactive isotopes are especially useful because they provide a way to put time into geochemical models. The chemical characteristic of an element is determined by the number of protons in its nucleus. Different elements can have different numbers of neutrons and thus atomic weights (the sum of protons plus neutrons). The atomic weight is equal to the sum of protons plus neutrons. The chart of the nuclides (protons versus neutrons) for elements 1 (Hydrogen) through 12 (Magnesium) is shown in Fig. 16-1. The Valley of Stability represents nuclides stable relative to decay. Examples: Atomic Protons Neutrons % Abundance Weight (Atomic Number) Carbon 12C 6P 6N 98.89 13C 6P 7N 1.11 14C 6P 8N 10-10 Oxygen 16O 8P 8N 99.76 17O 8P 9N 0.024 18O 8P 10N 0.20 Several light elements such as H, C, N, O, and S have more than one stable isotope form, which show variable abundances in natural samples.
    [Show full text]
  • Quest for Superheavy Nuclei Began in the 1940S with the Syn­ Time It Takes for Half of the Sample to Decay
    FEATURES Quest for superheavy nuclei 2 P.H. Heenen l and W Nazarewicz -4 IService de Physique Nucleaire Theorique, U.L.B.-C.P.229, B-1050 Brussels, Belgium 2Department ofPhysics, University ofTennessee, Knoxville, Tennessee 37996 3Physics Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37831 4Institute ofTheoretical Physics, University ofWarsaw, ul. Ho\.za 69, PL-OO-681 Warsaw, Poland he discovery of new superheavy nuclei has brought much The superheavy elements mark the limit of nuclear mass and T excitement to the atomic and nuclear physics communities. charge; they inhabit the upper right corner of the nuclear land­ Hopes of finding regions of long-lived superheavy nuclei, pre­ scape, but the borderlines of their territory are unknown. The dicted in the early 1960s, have reemerged. Why is this search so stability ofthe superheavy elements has been a longstanding fun­ important and what newknowledge can it bring? damental question in nuclear science. How can they survive the Not every combination ofneutrons and protons makes a sta­ huge electrostatic repulsion? What are their properties? How ble nucleus. Our Earth is home to 81 stable elements, including large is the region of superheavy elements? We do not know yet slightly fewer than 300 stable nuclei. Other nuclei found in all the answers to these questions. This short article presents the nature, although bound to the emission ofprotons and neutrons, current status ofresearch in this field. are radioactive. That is, they eventually capture or emit electrons and positrons, alpha particles, or undergo spontaneous fission. Historical Background Each unstable isotope is characterized by its half-life (T1/2) - the The quest for superheavy nuclei began in the 1940s with the syn­ time it takes for half of the sample to decay.
    [Show full text]
  • Nuclear Binding & Stability
    Nuclear Binding & Stability Stanley Yen TRIUMF UNITS: ENERGY Energy measured in electron-Volts (eV) 1 volt battery boosts energy of electrons by 1 eV 1 volt -19 battery 1 e-Volt = 1.6x10 Joule 1 MeV = 106 eV 1 GeV = 109 eV Recall that atomic and molecular energies ~ eV nuclear energies ~ MeV UNITS: MASS From E = mc2 m = E / c2 so we measure masses in MeV/c2 1 MeV/c2 = 1.7827 x 10 -30 kg Frequently, we get lazy and just set c=1, so that we measure masses in MeV e.g. mass of electron = 0.511 MeV mass of proton = 938.272 MeV mass of neutron=939.565 MeV Also widely used unit of mass is the atomic mass unit (amu or u) defined so that Mass(12C atom) = 12 u -27 1 u = 931.494 MeV = 1.6605 x 10 kg nucleon = proton or neutron “nuclide” means one particular nuclear species, e.g. 7Li and 56Fe are two different nuclides There are 4 fundamental types of forces in the universe. 1. Gravity – very weak, negligible for nuclei except for neutron stars 2. Electromagnetic forces – Coulomb repulsion tends to force protons apart ) 3. Strong nuclear force – binds nuclei together; short-ranged 4. Weak nuclear force – causes nuclear beta decay, almost negligible compared to the strong and EM forces. How tightly a nucleus is bound together is mostly an interplay between the attractive strong force and the repulsive electromagnetic force. Let's make a scatterplot of all the stable nuclei, with proton number Z versus neutron number N.
    [Show full text]
  • NUCLIDES FAR OFF the STABILITY LINE and SUPER-HEAVY NUCLEI in HEAVY-ION NUCLEAR REACTIONS Marc Lefort
    NUCLIDES FAR OFF THE STABILITY LINE AND SUPER-HEAVY NUCLEI IN HEAVY-ION NUCLEAR REACTIONS Marc Lefort To cite this version: Marc Lefort. NUCLIDES FAR OFF THE STABILITY LINE AND SUPER-HEAVY NUCLEI IN HEAVY-ION NUCLEAR REACTIONS. Journal de Physique Colloques, 1972, 33 (C5), pp.C5-73-C5- 102. 10.1051/jphyscol:1972507. jpa-00215109 HAL Id: jpa-00215109 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/jpa-00215109 Submitted on 1 Jan 1972 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. JOURNAL RE PHYSIQUE CoLIoque C5, supplement au no 8-9, Tome 33, Aoiit-Septembre 1972, page C5-73 NUCLIDES FAR OFF THE STABILITY LINE AND SUPER-HEAVY NUCLEI IN HEAW-ION NUCLEAR REACTIONS by Marc Lefort Chimie Nucleaire-Institut de Physique Nucleaire-ORSAY, France Abstract A review is given on the new species which attempts already made for the synthesis of super- have been produced in the recent years by heavy ion heavy elements. A discussion is presented on the reactions, mainly 12C, 160, ''0, 22~eand 20~eions. following problems : reaction thresholds and The first section is devoted to the formation of coulomb barriers for heavily charged projectiles, neutron rich exotic light nuclei and to the mecha- complete fusion cross section as compared to the nism of multinuclear transfer reactions responsible total cross section, main decay channels for exci- for this formation.
    [Show full text]
  • The Delimiting/Frontier Lines of the Constituents of Matter∗
    The delimiting/frontier lines of the constituents of matter∗ Diógenes Galetti1 and Salomon S. Mizrahi2 1Instituto de Física Teórica, Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP), São Paulo, SP, Brasily 2Departamento de Física, CCET, Universidade Federal de São Carlos, São Carlos, SP, Brasilz (Dated: October 23, 2019) Abstract Looking at the chart of nuclides displayed at the URL of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) [1] – that contains all the known nuclides, the natural and those produced artificially in labs – one verifies the existence of two, not quite regular, delimiting lines between which dwell all the nuclides constituting matter. These lines are established by the highly unstable radionuclides located the most far away from those in the central locus, the valley of stability. Here, making use of the “old” semi-empirical mass formula for stable nuclides together with the energy-time uncertainty relation of quantum mechanics, by a simple calculation we show that the obtained frontier lines, for proton and neutron excesses, present an appreciable agreement with the delimiting lines. For the sake of presenting a somewhat comprehensive panorama of the matter in our Universe and their relation with the frontier lines, we narrate, in brief, what is currently known about the astrophysical nucleogenesis processes. Keywords: chart of nuclides, nucleogenesis, nuclide mass formula, valley/line of stability, energy-time un- certainty relation, nuclide delimiting/frontier lines, drip lines arXiv:1909.07223v2 [nucl-th] 22 Oct 2019 ∗ This manuscript is based on an article that was published in Brazilian portuguese language in the journal Revista Brasileira de Ensino de Física, 2018, 41, e20180160. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/ 1806-9126-rbef-2018-0160.
    [Show full text]
  • The R-Process of Stellar Nucleosynthesis: Astrophysics and Nuclear Physics Achievements and Mysteries
    The r-process of stellar nucleosynthesis: Astrophysics and nuclear physics achievements and mysteries M. Arnould, S. Goriely, and K. Takahashi Institut d'Astronomie et d'Astrophysique, Universit´eLibre de Bruxelles, CP226, B-1050 Brussels, Belgium Abstract The r-process, or the rapid neutron-capture process, of stellar nucleosynthesis is called for to explain the production of the stable (and some long-lived radioac- tive) neutron-rich nuclides heavier than iron that are observed in stars of various metallicities, as well as in the solar system. A very large amount of nuclear information is necessary in order to model the r-process. This concerns the static characteristics of a large variety of light to heavy nuclei between the valley of stability and the vicinity of the neutron-drip line, as well as their beta-decay branches or their reactivity. Fission probabilities of very neutron-rich actinides have also to be known in order to determine the most massive nuclei that have a chance to be involved in the r-process. Even the properties of asymmetric nuclear matter may enter the problem. The enormously challenging experimental and theoretical task imposed by all these requirements is reviewed, and the state-of-the-art development in the field is presented. Nuclear-physics-based and astrophysics-free r-process models of different levels of sophistication have been constructed over the years. We review their merits and their shortcomings. The ultimate goal of r-process studies is clearly to identify realistic sites for the development of the r-process. Here too, the challenge is enormous, and the solution still eludes us.
    [Show full text]
  • CHAPTER 2 the Nucleus and Radioactive Decay
    1 CHEMISTRY OF THE EARTH CHAPTER 2 The nucleus and radioactive decay 2.1 The atom and its nucleus An atom is characterized by the total positive charge in its nucleus and the atom’s mass. The positive charge in the nucleus is Ze , where Z is the total number of protons in the nucleus and e is the charge of one proton. The number of protons in an atom, Z, is known as the atomic number and dictates which element an atom represents. The nucleus is also made up of N number of neutrally charged particles of similar mass as the protons. These are called neutrons . The combined number of protons and neutrons, Z+N , is called the atomic mass number A. A specific nuclear species, or nuclide , is denoted by A Z Γ 2.1 where Γ represents the element’s symbol. The subscript Z is often dropped because it is redundant if the element’s symbol is also used. We will soon learn that a mole of protons and a mole of neutrons each have a mass of approximately 1 g, and therefore, the mass of a mole of Z+N should be very close to an integer 1. However, if we look at a periodic table, we will notice that an element’s atomic weight, which is the mass of one mole of its atoms, is rarely close to an integer. For example, Iridium’s atomic weight is 192.22 g/mole. The reason for this discrepancy is that an element’s neutron number N can vary.
    [Show full text]
  • Synthesis of Neutron-Rich Transuranic Nuclei in Fissile Spallation Targets
    Synthesis of neutron-rich transuranic nuclei in fissile spallation targets Igor Mishustina,b, Yury Malyshkina,c, Igor Pshenichnova,c, Walter Greinera aFrankfurt Institute for Advanced Studies, J.-W. Goethe University, 60438 Frankfurt am Main, Germany b“Kurchatov Institute”, National Research Center, 123182 Moscow, Russia cInstitute for Nuclear Research, Russian Academy of Science, 117312 Moscow, Russia Abstract A possibility of synthesizing neutron-reach super-heavy elements in spal- lation targets of Accelerator Driven Systems (ADS) is considered. A dedi- cated software called Nuclide Composition Dynamics (NuCoD) was developed to model the evolution of isotope composition in the targets during a long-time irradiation by intense proton and deuteron beams. Simulation results show that transuranic elements up to 249Bk can be produced in multiple neutron capture reactions in macroscopic quantities. However, the neutron flux achievable in a spallation target is still insufficient to overcome the so-called fermium gap. Fur- ther optimization of the target design, in particular, by including moderating material and covering it by a reflector will turn ADS into an alternative source of transuranic elements in addition to nuclear fission reactors. 1. Introduction Neutrons propagating in a medium induce different types of nuclear reactions depending on their energy. Apart of the elastic scattering, the main reaction types for low-energy neutrons are fission and neutron capture, which dominate, respectively, at higher and lower energies with the boarder
    [Show full text]