Shell Model: Filling Up Nuclei

In summary: PMC2692805/ ). In summary, the shell model explains how the potential energy due to the other nucleons in the nucleus is combined to create specific energy levels. The levels are determined by the quantum numbers ##n_r## and ##l##, which can change depending on the surrounding nuclei. This is used to calculate the energies of nuclei, and the Aufbau principle can be used to predict the order of shell closure.
  • #1
pierce15
315
2
I'm a bit confused about how things fill up in the shell model. Here is my understanding: the potential we are working with is the net potential due to the other nucleons that a proton or neutron feels throughout the nucleus; it is a combination of a square and harmonic oscillator potential. When this is solved (not accounting for spin-orbit coupling, yet), we get energy levels that depend on the quantum numbers ##n_r## and ##l##.

What I don't understand is how this is used to "build up" the nucleus. I have a hard time believing that when accounting for spin-orbit coupling, the levels always fill up in the order spdsfpgdshfpig for every nucleus, since the potential changes (radius of well ##\propto A^{1/3}##). I recall that while studying the related Hartree-Fock method for atoms, the order of filling of inner subshells changed dramatically while increasing in atomic number -- i.e. the Aufbau principle is actually not a good rule, and the order of filling can't be accurately determined without a graph/table on hand.

Of course, this is an important question since if the levels aren't the same for everything, then the "magic numbers" for that potential won't be the same magic numbers for everything -- i.e. a different nucleus will have different states which are unexpectedly stable.

So is it really the case that everything has the same energy levels/magic numbers? As much as I hate exceptions to the rules, I'm a bit suspicious.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
pierce15 said:
I'm a bit confused about how things fill up in the shell model.

one must consider the a sizable spin-orbit interaction which
splits the levels by an energy difference which depends on orbital quantum number.
as l increases the split-energy also increases.

This leads to the overlapping levels .say e.g. 1d3/2 going above 2s , 1f1/2 going above 2p 3/2 so the filling up order changes
so if a fresh energy level diagram with spin orbit coupling is drawn then the magic number nuclei can emerge as closed shell structures.
 
  • #3
pierce15 said:
I'm a bit confused about how things fill up in the shell model. Here is my understanding: the potential we are working with is the net potential due to the other nucleons that a proton or neutron feels throughout the nucleus; it is a combination of a square and harmonic oscillator potential. When this is solved (not accounting for spin-orbit coupling, yet), we get energy levels that depend on the quantum numbers ##n_r## and ##l##.

What I don't understand is how this is used to "build up" the nucleus. I have a hard time believing that when accounting for spin-orbit coupling, the levels always fill up in the order spdsfpgdshfpig for every nucleus, since the potential changes (radius of well ##\propto A^{1/3}##). I recall that while studying the related Hartree-Fock method for atoms, the order of filling of inner subshells changed dramatically while increasing in atomic number -- i.e. the Aufbau principle is actually not a good rule, and the order of filling can't be accurately determined without a graph/table on hand.

Of course, this is an important question since if the levels aren't the same for everything, then the "magic numbers" for that potential won't be the same magic numbers for everything -- i.e. a different nucleus will have different states which are unexpectedly stable.

So is it really the case that everything has the same energy levels/magic numbers? As much as I hate exceptions to the rules, I'm a bit suspicious.

No, it's not really the case that all nuclei have the same energy levels or magic numbers! For instance, the N=20 shell closure disappears for neutron rich isotones. ( http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0370269392913209 and http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/037026939500012A ). Have you come across the Nilsson model? You'll see very quickly that energy levels (and the order of filling) changes rapidly away from spherical nuclei. Here's rather a good set of slides.
 

1. What is the Shell Model?

The Shell Model, also known as the Nuclear Shell Model, is a model used to describe the structure of atomic nuclei. It is based on the idea that nucleons (protons and neutrons) occupy different energy levels or "shells" within the nucleus, similar to how electrons occupy different energy levels in an atom.

2. How does the Shell Model work?

In the Shell Model, nucleons are arranged in energy levels or shells, with each shell having a maximum number of nucleons it can hold. The first shell can hold up to 2 nucleons, the second shell can hold up to 8 nucleons, and so on. As more nucleons are added, they fill up the available shells in a specific order, following the Pauli exclusion principle and the Hund's rule.

3. What is the significance of the Shell Model?

The Shell Model helps us understand the stability and properties of atomic nuclei. It explains why certain nuclei are more stable than others and why some elements have multiple stable isotopes. It also plays a crucial role in predicting and understanding nuclear reactions.

4. How is the Shell Model different from the Liquid Drop Model?

The Liquid Drop Model is another model that describes the structure of atomic nuclei. While the Shell Model focuses on the arrangement of nucleons in energy levels, the Liquid Drop Model considers the nucleus as a liquid drop with a surface tension. It takes into account the strong and weak nuclear forces as well as the Coulomb force between protons.

5. Can the Shell Model accurately predict the properties of all nuclei?

No, the Shell Model is limited in its predictive power as it becomes increasingly complex for larger nuclei. It is most accurate for lighter nuclei with a small number of nucleons. For more complex nuclei, other models and experimental data are needed to accurately describe their properties.

Similar threads

  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
732
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
937
Back
Top