A Thorium-229's excited state at 8.355733554021(8) eV

  • A
  • Thread starter Thread starter mfb
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Ev
Click For Summary
Recent research published in Nature details the precise measurement of the frequency ratio of the 229mTh nuclear isomeric transition compared to the 87Sr atomic clock, achieving an uncertainty of just 2 kHz, or 1 part in a trillion. While this precision does not surpass the best atomic clocks, it demonstrates the capability to measure nuclear transitions using atomic clock technology. The findings suggest that utilizing nuclei could enhance stability in timekeeping. The study highlights thorium's unusually low excited state, which has been measured with unprecedented accuracy. This research opens avenues for future advancements in atomic clock technology and nuclear physics.
Messages
37,387
Reaction score
14,216
TL;DR
Frequency comb measurements of thorium's unusually low excited state have measured its energy much more precisely.
Missed this on arXiv, now it's published: Frequency ratio of the 229mTh nuclear isomeric transition and the 87Sr atomic clock
They measure the frequency of the transition radiation with an uncertainty of just 2 kHz or 1 part in a trillion. That's not beating the best atomic clocks yet, but it shows that you can measure this transition with the tools used for atomic clocks - and then exploit the better stability you get from using nuclei instead of atoms.
 
  • Like
Likes ohwilleke, .Scott, Astronuc and 2 others
Physics news on Phys.org
mfb said:
TL;DR Summary: Frequency comb measurements of thorium's unusually low excited state have measured its energy much more precisely.

Missed this on arXiv, now it's published: Frequency ratio of the 229mTh nuclear isomeric transition and the 87Sr atomic clock
They measure the frequency of the transition radiation with an uncertainty of just 2 keV or 1 part in a trillion. That's not beating the best atomic clocks yet, but it shows that you can measure this transition with the tools used for atomic clocks - and then exploit the better stability you get from using nuclei instead of atoms.
Out of respect for the folks who did the work, the authors of the new paper (in the journal Nature) are:
  • Chuankun Zhang,
  • Tian Ooi,
  • Jacob S. Higgins,
  • Jack F. Doyle,
  • Lars von der Wense,
  • Kjeld Beeks,
  • Adrian Leitner,
  • Georgy A. Kazakov,
  • Peng Li,
  • Peter G. Thirolf,
  • Thorsten Schumm &
  • Jun Ye
 
Thread 'Some confusion with the Binding Energy graph of atoms'
My question is about the following graph: I keep on reading that fusing atoms up until Fe-56 doesn’t cost energy and only releases binding energy. However, I understood that fusing atoms also require energy to overcome the positive charges of the protons. Where does that energy go after fusion? Does it go into the mass of the newly fused atom, escape as heat or is the released binding energy shown in the graph actually the net energy after subtracting the required fusion energy? I...
Hello everyone, I am trying to calculate the energy loss and straggling of alpha particles with same energy, I used LISE++ to obtain the energy loss in every layer of the materials using Spectrometer Design of LISE++, but I can only calculate the energy-loss straggling layer by layer. Does anyone know the way to obtain the energy-loss straggling caused by every layer? Any help would be appreciated. J.