Nuclear Shell Model - Spin-parity of excited states

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around understanding the spin-parity values of excited states in the nuclear shell model for _{6}Cl^{13}. The ground state is identified as 1/2- with subsequent excited states being 1/2+, 3/2-, and 5/2+. The user is attempting to determine the configurations that correspond to these spin-parity values, starting with the initial configuration of nucleons. However, confusion arises as multiple configurations seem to fit the criteria for the first excitation, leading to uncertainty about the correct approach. The user seeks clarification on whether they are interpreting the question correctly and how to proceed with identifying the configurations for the excited states.
Manman
Messages
5
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



The ground state of _{6}Cl^{13} has spin-parity 1/2- and the next three excited states have values of 1/2+, 3/2- and 5/2+. Explain these values in terms of the shell model.

The Attempt at a Solution



The problem is that i don't know what is being asked of me...i initially tried to go through the excitations and work out which configurations fit each one, but lots do!

In more detail, I know that initially there is 1 extra p in 1P_{1/2}

The initial configuration is:

<br /> (1s_\frac{1}{2})^2(1p_\frac{3}{2})^4(1p_\frac{1}{2 })^1<br />

A configuration that could give a spin-parity of 1/2+ for the first excitation:

<br /> (1s_\frac{1}{2})^2(1p_\frac{3}{2})^3(1p_\frac{1}{2 })^1(1d_\frac{5}{2})^1<br />

or

<br /> (1s_\frac{1}{2})^2(1p_\frac{3}{2})^4(1p_\frac{1}{2 })^0(1d_\frac{5}{2})^0(2s_\frac{1}{2})^1<br />

Now, if this is correct then we can follow on from this in 2 directions, and each one of these splits into many options for the 2nd excited state. And we do not getting any definite configuration for any of the excited states.

Am i going about this correctly? Maybe the question is asking something entirely different.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
no luck so far, anyone?
 
Thread 'Help with Time-Independent Perturbation Theory "Good" States Proof'
(Disclaimer: this is not a HW question. I am self-studying, and this felt like the type of question I've seen in this forum. If there is somewhere better for me to share this doubt, please let me know and I'll transfer it right away.) I am currently reviewing Chapter 7 of Introduction to QM by Griffiths. I have been stuck for an hour or so trying to understand the last paragraph of this proof (pls check the attached file). It claims that we can express Ψ_{γ}(0) as a linear combination of...
Back
Top