Understanding K Mixing Level, K Selectivity and K Quantum Numbers

Creator
Messages
566
Reaction score
6
Can someone explain in simple terms "K mixing level" and "K selectivity" in nuclear decay processes ? ...as it relates to the "K quantum number".
And does it relate directly to the nuclear angular momentum?...and selection rules? How so?
Dumb it down for me please.
Thank you kindly.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
For a nonspherical nucleus, K is the projection of total angular momentum on the body axis. A K-mixing level is a state which is a superposition of wavefunctions with different values of K. Here's a paper which describes it.
 
Last edited:
Bill_K said:
For a nonspherical nucleus, K is the projection of total angular momentum on the body axis. A K-mixing level is a state which is a superposition of wavefunctions with different values of K. "www.hafniumisomer.org/isomer/97FindIsomer.pdf‎" which describes it.

Thanks much, Bill...However, your link is not working; please check it; I would like to read it.
Thanks;
Creator
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bill_K said:
Sorry, the correct link is http://www.hafniumisomer.org/isomer/97FindIsomer.pdf

Thanks again Bill; that is the exact article from which I drew my original question. Since you seem to have a better handle on this nuclear isomer business than me, let me take it a step further.
Can you please explain exactly what the author is getting at in the first 3 paragraphs. Is he saying the selection rules prevent EM decay due to high total orbital nuclear angular momentum as compared to change in total A. M. of transition,... (and also since such is the case in which transitional change in K being so much smaller than L ).?? Please explain in detail if you can. Is the isomer meta-stable due to the smallness of delta J or delta K ?
Thanks.
...
 

Thread 'Toponium Discovered'

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...
View full post »

Thread 'Dirac-Delta from Normalization of Continuous Eigenfunctions'

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}...
View full post »

Similar threads

I Understanding Nuclear Rotation: Quantum Numbers and Wavefunctions
Replies
1
Views
2K
I Understand selection rules in ##\beta##-decay/EC
Replies
3
Views
2K
A Creating a new compound (involving K,Ca,H,N). Is it possible?
Replies
1
Views
1K
Quantum Quantum Textbook For Density Matrix, Pure & Mixed States, +more
Replies
2
Views
3K
A Carrier relaxation within a quantum well
Replies
4
Views
3K
B Are real theories undiscoverable from effective field theories?
Replies
4
Views
2K
Orbital quantum number in the shell model
Replies
2
Views
2K
Ladder operators in electron field and electron's charge
Replies
1
Views
1K
I How Do Quantum Numbers Influence Energy Levels in Atomic Systems?
Replies
15
Views
2K
B Direct sum decomposition into orthogonal subspaces
Replies
2
Views
1K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top