Looking at the spin of 7N7 and 9F10

  • Thread starter Thread starter bluestar
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Spin
bluestar
Messages
80
Reaction score
0
I have worked out the total spin for the elements up to Neon however I hit a snag with Nitrogen and Fluorine.

The shell sequence of nitrogen 7N7 is 1s2, 2s2, 2p3 for both the proton and neutron and the total angular spin is 1

Likewise, Fluorine 9F10 is 1s2, 2s2, 2p5 for the proton and 1s2, 2s2, 2p6 for the neutron and the total angular spin is ½

In the nitrogen isotope it would appear that the 3 protons and neutrons are not paired and occupy separate states in the 2p shell. Thus the total orbital angular momentum would be 3 and the total spin would be 3/2 for the protons and additional for the neutrons suggesting the total angular momentum of 9 which is wrong.

So do 2 of the protons in different states in the 2p shell pair up their orbital and spin angular momentum? Likewise do 2 of the neutrons in the 2p shell pair up their orbital and spin angular momentum? If so, this would leave yield an orbital momentum of 1 for the proton and 1 for the neutron; likewise, the spin of the two separate nucleons sum up to 1. This would then yield a total angular momentum of 2 + 1 = 3 with is also wrong.

The only way I can see to achieve a total angular momentum of 1 is if the spin of the proton and neutron were both negative, which I considered wrong because unpaired particle spin were always positive. So can an unpaired particle have a negative spin?

With respect to 9F10 there are 2 sets of paired protons plus 1 separate in the 2p shell and all neutrons are paired. This would produce an orbital angular momentum of 1 and a spin of ½ for a total of 3/2; however JANICE indicates this isotope has only ½ spin suggesting the proton spin was -1/2.

Can anyone shed any light on the total spin of these two isotopes?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Are you looking at the nuclear shells or the electron shells? They're not the same. What you're giving look like electron shell configurations.

Check out the Wikipedia page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_shell_model" . According to the nuclear shell model as described there (see the graph on the right in the "predicted magic numbers" section), 7N7 would have 1s(1/2) - 2, 1p(3/2) - 4, 1p(1/2) - 1 for protons, and the same for neutrons. The total spin would be 1 (1/2 each for the unpaired proton and neutron).

9F10 would have 1s(1/2) - 2, 1p(3/2) - 4, 1p(1/2) - 2, 1d(5/2) - 1 for protons, and the same except 1d(5/2) - 2 for neutrons. The total spin would be 1/2 for the unpaired proton.

(Pedantic note: these are, of course, the ground states of these nuclei. This actually does make a difference for the 7N7 case, because there is also a spin-0 state possible for that nucleus, with the same shell configuration, where the unpaired proton and neutron have opposite spins; however, this state has higher energy than the spin-1 state where the unpaired proton and neutron spins are aligned. I've been unable to find a reference online with a good simple explanation of why that is, but I suspect it's because the magnetic moments of the proton and neutron are of opposite signs--the proton is about +2.8 and the neutron is about -2, in the standard units for magnetic moments of elementary particles--which means that when their spins are aligned, their magnetic moments attract each other--opposite magnetic poles attract just as opposite charges do--so that the nucleus as a whole is a little bit more tightly bound--lower total energy--whereas when the spins are opposite, the magnetic moments repel each other and the nucleus as a whole is a little bit less tightly bound--higher total energy.)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thread 'Why is there such a difference between the total cross-section data? (simulation vs. experiment)'
Well, I'm simulating a neutron-proton scattering phase shift. The equation that I solve numerically is the Phase function method and is $$ \frac{d}{dr}[\delta_{i+1}] = \frac{2\mu}{\hbar^2}\frac{V(r)}{k^2}\sin(kr + \delta_i)$$ ##\delta_i## is the phase shift for triplet and singlet state, ##\mu## is the reduced mass for neutron-proton, ##k=\sqrt{2\mu E_{cm}/\hbar^2}## is the wave number and ##V(r)## is the potential of interaction like Yukawa, Wood-Saxon, Square well potential, etc. I first...
Toponium is a hadron which is the bound state of a valance top quark and a valance antitop quark. Oversimplified presentations often state that top quarks don't form hadrons, because they decay to bottom quarks extremely rapidly after they are created, leaving no time to form a hadron. And, the vast majority of the time, this is true. But, the lifetime of a top quark is only an average lifetime. Sometimes it decays faster and sometimes it decays slower. In the highly improbable case that...
I'm following this paper by Kitaev on SL(2,R) representations and I'm having a problem in the normalization of the continuous eigenfunctions (eqs. (67)-(70)), which satisfy \langle f_s | f_{s'} \rangle = \int_{0}^{1} \frac{2}{(1-u)^2} f_s(u)^* f_{s'}(u) \, du. \tag{67} The singular contribution of the integral arises at the endpoint u=1 of the integral, and in the limit u \to 1, the function f_s(u) takes on the form f_s(u) \approx a_s (1-u)^{1/2 + i s} + a_s^* (1-u)^{1/2 - i s}. \tag{70}...

Similar threads

Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
6K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Back
Top