SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Bitlis Eren University Journal of Science and Technology / 2026 / Volume: 10 Issue: 1

Effect of deformation on gamow-teller strength and electron capture cross-section for chromium isotopes

Asim Ullah(GIK Institute of Engineering Sciences & Technology)0000-0002-2653-310X
Muahmmad Riaz(GIK Institute of Engineering Sciences & Technology)0000-0003-4521-4259
Jameel-un Nabı(GIK Institute of Engineering Sciences & Technology)0000-0002-8229-8757
Mahmut Böyükata(KIRIKKALE ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-8065-9993
Necla Çakmak(KARABÜK ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0001-5989-6663
Pages
—
Publication Date
2020-06-18
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The ECC was computed as a function of the β parameter and the results suggest that the calculated ECC decreased with decreasing value of the β for the selected cases.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In this work, we explore the role of deformation parameter (β) on the calculated Gamow-Teller (GT) strength distributions and electron capture cross-sections (ECC) for 46,48,50 Cr isotopes within the formalism of the proton neutron-quasi-particle random phase approximation (pn-QRPA).
📊
Key Findings & Data:The third one is the experimental β values obtained by employing its relation with the experimental B(E2)↑ values.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The ECC was computed as a function of the β parameter and the results suggest that the calculated ECC decreased with decreasing value of the β for the selected cases.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Gamow-Teller · Electron capture cross section · pn-QRPA

Abstract

In this work, we explore the role of deformation parameter (β) on the calculated Gamow-Teller (GT) strength distributions and electron capture cross-sections (ECC) for 46,48,50 Cr isotopes within the formalism of the proton neutron-quasi-particle random phase approximation (pn-QRPA). Three different β parameters were used in the present study. Two of them were calculated by using the interacting boson model (IBM) and the macroscopic-microscopic (Mac-mic) models. The third one is the experimental β values obtained by employing its relation with the experimental B(E2)↑ values. The GT strength distributions were widely dispersed among all the daughter states of the given isotopes. They were found to have an inverse relation with the β parameter i.e decreasing with increasing the β value. The ECC was computed as a function of the β parameter and the results suggest that the calculated ECC decreased with decreasing value of the β for the selected cases.

🔖

Cite This Article

Ullah, A., Riaz, M., Nabı, J., Böyükata, M., Çakmak, N. (2020). Effect of deformation on gamow-teller strength and electron capture cross-section for chromium isotopes. Bitlis Eren University Journal of Science and Technology, Volume: 10 Issue: 1. https://doi.org/10.17678/beuscitech.640157

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (31)

  1. G. M. Fuller, W. A. Fowler and M. J. Newman, Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser. 42 (1980).
  2. E. M. Burbidge, G. R. Burbidge, W. A. Fowler and F. Hoyle, Rev. Mod. Phys. 29 (1957) 547.
  3. P. G. Giannaka and T. S. Kosmas, Electron Capture Cross Sections for Stellar Nucleosynthesis, Adv. H. E. Phys. 2015, (2014) 11.
  4. G. Marti ̀nez-Pinedo, K. Langanke, D. J. Dean, Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser. 126 (2000) 493.
  5. A. Heger, K. Langanke, G. Marti ̀nez-Pinedo, S. E. Woosley, Phys. Rev. Lett. 86 (2001) 1678.
  6. A. Ullah, J.-U. Nabi and M. Riaz, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 28 (2019) 2040011.
  7. J.-U. Nabi and M. Riaz, J. Phys. G: Nucl. Part. Phys. 47, (2019) 085201.
  8. J.-U. Nabi, M. Böyükata, Nucl. Phy. A 947 (2016) 182.
  9. J.-U. Nabi, Böyükata, Astrophys Space Sci. 362 (2017) 9.
  10. J.-U. Nabi, M. Ishfaq, M. Böyükata, M. Riaz, Nucl. Phy. A 966 (2017) 1.
  11. S. G. Nilsson, G Nilsson, Mat. Fys. Medd. K. Dan. Vidensk. Selsk. 29 (1955) 16.
  12. K. Ikeda, S. Fujii and J. I. Fujita, Phys. Lett. 3, (1963) 271.
  13. I. Ragnarsson and R. K. Sheline, Phys. Scr. 29, (1984) 385.
  14. G. Audi, F. Kondev, M. Wang, W. Huang, and S. Naimi, Chinese physics C, 41 (2017) 030001.
  15. K. Nakamura, (Particle Data Group): J. Phys. G, Nucl. Part. Phys. 37, (2010) 075021.
  16. J. C. Hardy, and I. S. Towner, Phys. Rev. C 79, (2009) 055502.
  17. N. Paar, G. Col‘o, E. Khan, and D. Vretenar, Phys. Rev.C 80 (2009) 055801.
  18. J. D. Walecka, Theoretical nuclear and subnuclear physics, (World Scientific Publishing Company, 2004).
  19. N. Gove and M. Martin, At. Data Nucl. Data Tables, 10 (1971) 205-219.
  20. J.-U. Nabi, A. N. Tawfik, N. Ezzelarab, and A. A. Khan, Astrophys. and Space Sc. 361 (2016) 71.
  21. J.-U. Nabi, A. N. Tawfik, N. Ezzelarab, and A. A. Khan, Phys. Scr. 91 (2016) 055301.
  22. P. Moller and J. R. Nix, At. Data Nucl. Data Tables, 26 (1981) 165-196.
  23. A. Arima and F. Iachello., Annals of Physics 99 (1976) 253-317.
  24. A. E. L. Dieperink, O. Scholten and F. Iachello, Phys. Rev. Lett. 44 (1980) 1747.
  25. A. E. L. Dieperink, O. Scholten, Nucl. Phys. A 346 (1980) 125.
  26. J. N. Ginocchio, M. W. Kirson, Phys. Rev. Lett. 44 (1980) 1744.
  27. J. N. Ginocchio, M. W. Kirson, Nucl. Phys. A 350 (1980) 31.
  28. P. Van Isacker and J.-Q. Chen, Phys. Rev. C 24 (1981) 684.
  29. A. Bohr and B. R. Mottelson, Nuclear Structure. Volume 2: Nuclear Deformation, World Scientific Publishing, 1998.
  30. National Nuclear Data Center (NNDC), http://www.nndc. bnl.gov/, 2019.
  31. K. Langanke, E. Kolbe, and D. Dean, Phys. Rev. C, 63 (2001) 032801.