ZACH MEISEL

AT O M I C N U C L E I

N O P U B L I S H E R N E C E S S A RY
About the cover: Particle tracks in a bubble chamber. Credit and copyright: CERN, P.Loiez / Science Photo
Library.

© 2019 Zach Meisel

Version 1.0, Released August 2019

latex template from: tufte-latex.googlecode.com

cbna
Except where explicitly noted, this work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-
ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) license.
 iii

Preface

This reference was created for use in a graduate-level introductory

nuclear physics course (PHYS 7501: Paricles & Nuclei 1) at Ohio Uni-
versity. The intended audience is advanced undergraduate and be-
ginning graduate students who have not yet had a formal nuclear
physics course. The format follows the tufte-book LATEXclass, found at
https://tufte-latex.github.io/tufte-latex/. The format features
wide margins to make room for reader notes and occasional side notes.
When I first taught nuclear physics, I had trouble finding a text-
book that had adequate coverage of the field at the appropriate level.
Most references tend to either emphasize arduous calculations or en-
gage in copious hand-waving. My preference is to present derivations
when they are enlightening, but to otherwise emphasize back-of-the-
envelope calculations. Many books also choose to emphasize nuclear
structure, reactions, radioactive decay, applications, or astrophysics,
but few texts provide a beginning picture of all topics. I wanted some-
thing that covered all of these at an introductory level. This is partly
due to convenience, we have one semester to cover it all at Ohio Uni-
versity, but also to emphasize inter-connectivity. My hope is that this
book achieves these goals.
Of course, no book stands alone and this text is heavily inspired
by many other books. Each chapter is peppered with references to the
literature and is concluded with a set of reference material which I pri-
marily relied upon for that chapter. Such reference material includes
published texts as well as open-access references, including other in-
structors’ course notes, databases, and manuals.

Note: This is a living document. Corrections, improvements, and

additions are all anticipated. Please mind the version number (listed
on the previous page) when referring to this text.

If you choose to use this book in your course, please let me

know. It helps provide impetus to keep things going. If you find
problems, inaccuracies, or glaring omissions, please contact me and I
can fix them.
 Contents

1 General Nuclear Properties 5

Bibliography 13

Index 17
List of Figures

1.1 The chart of nuclides. 8

1.2 Half-lives on the nuclear landscape. 8
1.3 Anticipated experimental reach on nuclear landscape. 8
1.4 mass defect trend. 9
1.5 Portion of valley of stability. 9
1.6 mass excess residual from liquid drop model. 10
1.7 Example level scheme. 10
List of Tables
Introduction

The atomic nucleus, hereafter referred to as the nucleus, plays a central

role in the universe as well as every day life. Though not the most fun-
damental unit of matter, nuclei generally defy description from more
microscopic building blocks and are thus an important subject of study
in their own right. Conceptually, we can divide the study of nuclei into
four themes: How are they put together?, How do they fall
apart?, How do they interact?, and How are they made and
detected?. These are the four organizing themes of this book.
Part 1: How are they put
together?
1
General Nuclear Properties

The nucleus is a conglomeration of nucleons, which is the general name

for protons and neutrons. A particular grouping of protons and neu-
trons, known as a nuclide, is referred to using the following notation:
A
Z S N . Here Z is the number of protons, N is the number of neutrons,
A = Z + N is the number of nucleons, and S is the chemical element
symbol from the periodic table, e.g. H for hydrogen. Since A and S
contain all the information you need, it is more common to see the
notation A S , particularly in nuclear physics journals1 . For instance, 1
An m following A indicates an isomer,
the most common form of carbon (Z = 6) in the universe has N = 6 the name for a long-lived excited state
(sometimes called metastable state) of a
and is thus written as 12 C. Conversationally, we read this as “carbon nucleus. E.g. 26m Al from astrophysics or
99m Tc from the medical isotope realm.
twelve".
Nuclides with the same Z but different N are referred to as iso-
topes2 . Nuclides with the same N but different Z are isotones. Nuclides 2
Often isotope is used in lieu of nuclide.
with the same A are isobars. Some light nuclides have nicknames that
provide a convenient short-hand due to their regular presence in as-
trophysics and applications:

AS Nickname Symbol 3
Rarely used. . . but let’s bring it back!

neutron n
1H proton p
2H deuteron d
3H triton t
3 He helion3 h
4 He alpha α

The size of a nucleus can be estimated via phenomenology. The

mass is roughly
M ( Z, A) = Au, (1.1)

where u = 931.494 MeV/c2 ≈ 1.66 × 10−24 g is the atomic mass unit

and c is the speed of light in vacuum. The atomic mass unit is defined4 4
Using a relative definition for the
atomic mass unit is a valuable tool for
high-precision nuclear mass measure-
ments [Scheidenberger et al., 2002].
6 atomic nuclei

such that M(12 C) ≡ 12 u. The charge radius of a nucleus is roughly

R( Z, A) = r0 A1/3 , (1.2)

where r0 ≈ 1.2 fm. For the root-mean-square (RMS) radius, an addi-

√
tional factor of 3/5 is needed.
As such, an estimate of the density of a nucleus is

#nucleons A A
n= = 4
= 4
≈ 0.14 nucleons/fm3 . (1.3)
V 3 πR
3 3
3 π (1.2fm) A

Note that this estimate is independent of A! Therefore, the density of a

nucleus is independent of its size, much the way that a liquid’s density
is independent of the size of a liquid drop. Partly inspired by this
property, some basic (and surprisingly accurate) nuclear calculations
are built on the liquid drop analogy [Gamow, 1930, Weizsäcker, 1935,
Bohr, 1936, Bohr and Wheeler, 1939]. Inserting the nucleon mass and
expressing Equation 1.3 in more familiar units, we find the nuclear
density corresponds to 2 × 1014 g/cm3 . To emphasize how staggering
this is, note that such a density is comparable to stuffing 100 copies
of the Great Pyramid of Giza into the volume of a grape. Why is
terrestrial matter then not extremely dense? Atoms are mostly empty
space, with atomic electrons residing out to ångström-scale distances
relative to the few-femtometer nuclear radius.

Nuclear transmutation, converting one or more nuclides into one

or more other nuclides, obeys some basic conservation laws. We can
determine if a few of these are satisfied by tallying up A and the elec-
tric charge q before and after the transmutation. Charge conservation
demands that ∑ qafter = ∑ qbefore , where q results from combining the
electric charges of any protons, positrons, and electrons. Baryon5 con- 5
A composite particle made of an odd-
servation requires ∑ Abefore = ∑ Aafter . Lepton6 number conservation stip- number of quarks; in our case, this is al-
ways 3.
ulates that ∑ Lbefore = ∑ Lafter , where L = n` − n` , with n` and n` as 6
A spin-½ elementary particle (i.e. no
the number of leptons and anti-leptons, respectively. Further rules that sub-components) that does not interact
determine the possibility and likelihood of a transmutation involve en- via the strong force. Here this will al-
most always be an electron e− , positron
ergetic considerations and spin/parity selection rules that we will get e+ , electron neutrino νe , or electron anti-
to in due time. Nonetheless, the aforementioned conservation rules neutrino νe .
provide a handy way to know whether a proposed transmutation is
sensible at first glance.
There are two types of nuclear transmutations: decays and reactions
7 . A decay is when a nucleus ejects radiation, such as an α, β, or γ, 7
The first wittingly measured radioac-
or splits apart as in fission. The capture of an electron is also classi- tive decay was α-decay from uranium in
1896 [Becquerel, 1896]. The first nuclear
fied with decays, since that quantum mechanical formalism is more reaction intentionally made in the labo-
applicable. Reactions are when multiple reactants interact to create ratory was 14 N(α, p) in 1919 [Rutherford,
1935].
one or more products. For instance, heavy nucleus X might combine
with light nucleus a to produce heavy nucleus Y and light nucleus b:
 general nuclear properties 7

X + a → Y + b. A more compact notation is typically used for conve-

nience: X ( a, b)Y, where the lighter reactant and product nuclides are
placed within the parentheses. Since we can employ our conservation
laws to determine what nuclide Y is if we know X, a, and b, it is com-
mon to see the notation X ( a, b). For example, when 12 C fuses with
an α and emits a photon, we write 12 C(α, γ)16 O, or even 12 C(α, γ).
The latter is read as "carbon-twelve alpha gamma". If instead a proton
were the light product, then we write 12 C(α, p)15 N, or 12 C(α, p), read
as "carbon-twelve alpha p".

Nuclear forces are the mechanisms for binding and transmuta-

tion of nuclei. Of the four fundamental forces in nature, gravita-
tional,electromagnetic, weak, and strong, we are primarily concerned
with the last three. The effective range and relative strength of the four
forces span many orders of magnitude:

Force Range (m) Relative Strength Force Carrier

Gravitational ∞ 10−38 Graviton
Weak 10−18 10−5 W ± , Z0
Electromagnetic ∞ αfs ≈ 1/137 Photon
Strong 10−15 1 Gluon, Pion

The force range is a result of the Heisenberg uncertainty princi-

ple. The force carrier must momentarily be created to mediate the
force, which briefly requires violating energy conservation by an en-
ergy increment ∆E ≥ Mfc c2 , where Mfc is the mass of the force car-
rier. This violation is only allowed for the time increment ∆t spec-
ified by the uncertainty principle, ∆E∆t ≥ h̄/2, where h̄ is the re-
duced Planck constant. As such, the force carrier must be reabsorbed
before ∆t ≤ h̄/(2∆E) has elapsed. Since the force carrier cannot
move faster than c, the furthest range the force carrier could travel
is R ≤ ∆tc = h̄c/(2∆E) = h̄c/(2Mfc c2 ) = h̄/(2Mfc c). Since this is all
a bit hand-wavy, we usually drop the factor of two and employ the
definition R ≡ h̄/( Mfc c).
We are now equipped to do order of magnitude estimates8 . The 8
The key to these calculations is that
graviton and photon are massless, so R = ∞ for their respective forces. h̄c ≈ 197 MeVfm. This is convenient be-
cause nuclear masses are generally avail-
For the weak force, Mfc ∼ 100 GeV/c2 , so Rweak ∼ 10−3 fm, suggesting able in units MeV/c2 .
this is something that takes place within a nucleon. The pion mass is
roughly 100 MeV/c2 and so Rstrong ∼ 1 fm, which is comparable to the
nucleon size.
8 atomic nuclei

The nuclear landscape is typically depicted using a Segrè plot,

more commonly known as the nuclear chart, or the chart of the nu-
clides, or sometimes the table of isotopes. Figure 1.1 is a typical
example, with each box representing an individual nuclide, where
the horizontal coordinate indicates N and the vertical coordinate Z.
Orientation is often provided by indicating which rows and columns
correspond to "magic" numbers of protons and neutrons, respectively.
Magicity is an important quantity that will be discussed in detail later
on. For now, suffice it to say that the magic nucleon numbers are N or
Z = 8, 20, 28, 50, 82, 126. Figure 1.1 uses the box color to indicate the
primary mode of radioactive decay for that nuclide. Black boxes do
not undergo decay and are thus known as stable. For reasons that will
be discussed shortly, the band of stable nuclides is known as the valley
of stability. Isotopes with a relative neutron deficiency are known as
proton-rich, whereas those with a relative neutron surplus are known
as neutron-rich.

Figure 1.1: The chart of nuclides with

magic numbers for Z and N indicated
on the right and left-hand side of the
colorful boxes, respectively. The color
map is courtesy of Edward Simpson’s
The Colourful Nuclide Chart. A simi-
lar chart that is conveniently linked to
a large number of nuclide properties is
available at the National Nuclear Data
Center (NNDC).

The nuclear chart is a powerful tool for comparing the evolution of

properties across the nuclear landscape. For instance, Figure 1.2 con-
Figure 1.2: Decay half-lives from Audi
trasts radioactive decay half-lives, emphasizing the orders-of-magnitude et al. [2017], displayed using The Colour-
range as well as the relative constancy across wide swaths of N and Z. ful Nuclide Chart.

Figure 1.3 highlights the gap between nuclides accessed by present nu- 100
10 -4

clear physics facilities, near-future facilities, and the predicted extent 80

10 -5
of the nuclear landscape. 60
Z

10 -6
Predicting the extent of the nuclear landscape will be discussed in 40
Valley of stability
Known mass in AME12
20 r-process path 10 -7
the following chapter. Nonetheless, it is interesting to consider how lit- rp-process path
FRDM 2n-drip-line
0 10 -8
tle we know about the full landscape at present. As of late 2019, ∼ 3000 0 20 40 60 80
N
100 120 140

nuclides have been observed in the laboratory. However, depending on Figure 1.3: Nuclear mass measurement
uncertainty anticipated for the Facility
for Rare Isotope Beams (FRIB) relative
to known nuclear masses and the two-
neutron dripline predicted by Moller
et al. [1995]. Based on Meisel [2016].
 general nuclear properties 9

the choice of theoretical mass model, on the order of ∼ 7000 nuclides

are thought to be possible [Erler et al., 2012].

The term "valley of stability" is used due to the trend in nu-

clear binding energies across the landscape. Early mass spectrome-
try showed that nuclear masses are nearly integer multiples of the
hydrogen-atom mass, which was known as the "whole number rule" [As-
ton, 1919]. However, high-precision work showed that deviations ex-
isted on the sub-percent level [Aston, 1924]. The deviation, shown in
Figure 1.4, is known as the mass defect, which means that the nuclear
mass is a little bit less than what you would obtain from summing the
constituent nucleon masses.
The mass defect is a consequence of Einstein’s postulate E = mc2 .
Figure 1.4: Deviation of experimen-
The nucleons within a nucleus are bound together, which requires tal masses in Wang et al. [2012] from
some binding energy. The nuclear binding energy BE is paid for via the whole-number rule. To calcu-
late: ∆M = [ M ( Z, N ) − [ ZM(1 H ) +
the reduced mass of the nucleus. That the conglomeration of bound
Nmn ]]/[ ZM(1 H ) + Nmn ].
nucleons is a lower-energy state relative to the same set of nucleons
un-bound is the only reason nucleons cluster together to form nuclei.
The binding energy is defined as

BE( Z, N ) ≡ Z (m p + me ) + Nmn − M ( Z, N ), (1.4)

where m p = 938.272 MeV/c2 is the proton mass, me = 0.511 MeV/c2

is the electron mass, is mn = 939.565 MeV/c2 is the neutron mass, and
M( Z, N ) is the nuclear mass. It is just as common to instead see the
atomic mass excess9 used: 9
ME is used here, though arguably ∆
is more common in the literature. The
way I see it, we’re already using BE for
ME( Z, N ) ≡ M( Z, N ) − ( Z + N )u, (1.5) binding energy and ∆ is overused as it is.
Plus, we need a way to feel like rebels.
where u is the previously encountered atomic mass unit. Regular eval-
uations of ME and BE are available from the Atomic Mass Data Cen-
ter. Each evaluation, based on essentially all pertinent literature up to
that point, is known as the Atomic Mass Evaluation (AME), e.g. [Wang
et al., 2012, 2017].
The first trend we notice from Equation 1.4 is that BE ∝ A, since
each nucleon has its own binding bonus and more nucleons means a
bigger bonus. To see more details, BE/A is used. Since the lowest- Figure 1.5: − BE/A in the nickel region,
revealing the "valley" of β-stability. Data
energy state is generally favored, all else being equal, it is informative are from Wang et al. [2012].
to look at − BE/A. Figure 1.4 shows − BE/A near nickel, where there
the "valley" is clearly visible. It is also clear that here BE/A ∼ 8 MeV,
which is also the case for most other nuclides with A & 30. As we will
see later, the slope of the valley walls directly impacts β-decay rates,
and hence the longer name "valley of β-stability" is often used. Ad-
ditionally, the binding energy features of the valley, sometimes called
the nuclear mass surface, can provide a useful mental tool to estimate
10 atomic nuclei

which reaction types will be favored over others, e.g. (α, p) vs. (α, n),
for a particular nuclide.
The binding energy trend looks smooth to the point of being boring.
What happens if we fit the surface with a smooth function10 and plot 10
Exactly which smooth function is dis-
the residual? As shown in Figure 1.6, striking trends emerge near cussed in the following chapter.

specific isotonic and isotopic chains. Namely, we see the emergence of

the magic numbers, a first indication of what magicity implies.

Figure 1.6: Absolute value of the dif-

ference between ME from Wang et al.
[2012] and the liquid drop model ME in
MeV. Based on Meisel [2015].

5
0 4
6
5
5
4
5 2 5
3 2 3 6
3
3 (0
2 ) 4
5 4
4
2
4 (1 ) (2
6 )
4
7
3
5
3 2
4 (3) (2 )
5 4 )
1 4
2 3 (2
4
2
4 1
2
3 4 31 6
31
1
3 4
2
4 3
3
3 2
6 5 2
3
5 2 5
2 3 2
5 4 1
1 4
0
6
2 5
3 2
1 2 3 2
4 5 4
2
3 0
3 0 1
2
4
4
5 31
1 2 3
5 4
3 2
4 2164
4
2 3
1 4
2 2
3 4 31 2
6
2 5 2
4 5
4
4 3551
5 2

A nuclide can exist in one of several energy states, where 1

2
4
2
6
2
6
2
4
1
3

1
6
4
4038

2
6 2014
3

the lowest is the ground state and all others are excited states. The states 1
1
1
2
4
2
44450
2
1083.4
3

31873
5
3 1399.2
2344 4 0 2118.5

represent possible configurations of the nucleons within the nucleus. 3 1879.2 5

3 3790
1448 1696.9
1762.5
2386 1600
1251.1 3032 1
1352.41286.8
2843.8 1352.1
2 3021.0
1723.13173.7 3
5
3498.9
2079.62124.7 1016.9
1 3633.4 2685 2

The discrete structure is a feature of the quantum mechanical nature of 3

5
1787.5
2267.7

2619.1
5262
2409.5
4016.12
4051.7
4684
4620
3528
3563
4443
4
1944 2734.72734.4
2869.23814.4 4
3251.93287.2
3287.5 3251.6
3662.0
4546.5
1289.0
5045

3467.0
727.2 3179.7 1
1122.8
2792.63780.4 5157.8

the nucleus, i.e. a continuum of internal energies is not possible. This 3

1
4099.7
4918.51483.73780.14801.9
3530.4
3488.4
1516.9 1618.1
1448.1
4391.82000.8
4391.5
2063.1
2098.8
1965.2
4141.74034.42036.5
1748.3
1784.0
6

2 2814.5
3661
3310.5
2885.6
2823.4
4
7315
4501

789.7 7159 2529.4 3905.1

6954
6890 2 2285.8

is a familiar feature from our knowledge of electron orbitals and the

2276.9
6712 3488.1
3 2057.56576.5
6480
3039.5 3140.8
3105.2
5615.6
1701.0 5534 6297
6049.8 1534.5
5799.7
5757.7 2
2312.45590.55692.4
4815.6
2 5563.1
2052.1 911.3

resultant chemical similarity of elements in a column of the periodic 1522.8

4327.0
4499.2
1657.24861.2
4798.9 4
4546.4
0
5084.0
3
10204
9803.7
3278.6
9651.8
3970.53925.4

table.
9484
9414.5 3795.2
2953.4
3640.6 9297.8
3 9119.89172.1
9163 9135 9213
9102.8
3315.4
3180.98887.8
2400.6
8734
8887.5
8760
8595.8 8492
8428.68530.5
8015.7

Much like electrons in the atom, nucleons have distinct orbitals 11443.52269.7
11430.1 7984.3
2260.8
7922.1
7715.97699.3
11262
7535.87637.0
7601.4
1658.37384.6
10898.1
10722 7125 7173
10594.010512
6808.8
6548.56478.9 0 6633.5

which they can occupy, known as single particle states. Filling these 9794.1
6153.7
6019.39477.8
9494.3 9379.9 4
5636.6
5601.0
9927

8903
5108.1 5099.3

in the most orderly way possible results in the ground state. Exciting 4912
8327.08257.4
4496.87932.2

7415.2
7379.5

one or more nucleons to higher orbitals results in an excited state. The 3200.7
2838.7
6877.9

lifetime of a ground state depends on the properties of a nucleus rel-

ative to neighboring nuclei in the nuclear landscape. The lifetime of 2

an excited state additionally depends on the properties of other states 1779.0

within the same nucleus. Each of these topics are covered in the second 0

28Si
part of this book.
From Figure 1.7 it is apparent that the plot of energy states in a Figure 1.7: Level scheme and known γ-
decays for 28 Si, generated using David
nucleus, known as a level scheme, can get pretty complicated. A few Radford’s RadWare with data from
the NNDC Evaluated Nuclear Structure
Data File (ENSDF).
 general nuclear properties 11

general features are worth noting here. Each state has an important
set of properties: excitation energy, the energy surplus over the ground
state; width, which is related to the time it takes for that state to de-
cay; spin, which is the intrinsic angular momentum; and parity, which
describes the symmetry of the wave function representing that state.
Note that the number of states increases dramatically with excitation
energy. This nuclear level density increases exponentially with excita-
tion energy, which will be explained later. The only reason the density
of levels begins to thin-out at higher excitation energies in Figure 1.7 is
that the experimental techniques used to identify levels tend to strug-
gle when many neighboring levels exist.

For historical perspective, the following is a selected list of major

developments from roughly the first half-century of nuclear physics11 : 11
Of course many exciting things have
happened since and they will be covered
• 1896: Radioactivity discovered12 [Becquerel, 1896] throughout the book. Also, there’s no
• 1905: Mass-energy equivalence proposed [Einstein, 1905] need to insult the living whose accom-
plishments would inadvertently (or de-
• 1911: Nuclear model of atom proposed [Rutherford, 1911] liberately!) be left out.
• 1913: Mass spectrometry invented13 [Thomson, 1913] 12
Due to an accident. Uranium salts
• 1919: Isotope existence discovered [Aston, 1919] were placed next to photographic plates.
• 1920: Nuclear transmutation proposed to power the sun [Edding- 13
Discovery of the proton.
ton, 1920]
• 1928: α-decay theory14 [Gamow, 1928] This is the first application of quantum
14

• 1929: Liquid drop model of nucleus proposed [Gamow, 1930] mechanics to a real world problem.
• 1932: Neutron discovered [Chadwick, 1932]
• 1932: Nuclei proposed to be interacting nucleons15 [Heisenberg, 15
Based on the discovery of the neutron.
1932]
• 1932: Nuclear transmutation using a particle accelerator16 [Cock- 16 7 Li( p, α ) α.

croft et al., 1932]

• 1934: Theory of β-decay [Fermi, 1934]17 17
This paper was rejected from Nature.
• 1935: Semi-empirical mass formula developed18 [Weizsäcker, 1935] 18
Based on the liquid drop model.
• 1936: Fusion theory19 [Bohr, 1936] 19
Based on the liquid drop model.
• 1939: Fission measured [Hahn and Strassmann, 1939, Abelson, 1939]
• 1939: Fission theory20 [Bohr and Wheeler, 1939, Meitner and Frisch, 20
Based on the liquid drop model.
1939]
• 1949: Magic number explanation [Mayer, 1949, Haxel et al., 1949]
• 1951/1952: Statistical nuclear reaction formalism [Wolfenstein, 1951,
Hauser and Feshbach, 1952]
• 1957: Comprehensive theory of nucleosynthesis [Burbidge et al.,
1957, Cameron, 1957]
• 1957: Parity violation discovered [Wu et al., 1957]

General References for This Chapter:

• Chapters 1 & 2: Loveland et al. [2006]

• Chapters 1 & 2: Martin [2006]
• Chapter 1: Brown [2005]
Bibliography

P. Abelson. Cleavage of the Uranium Nucleus. Physical Review, 55:418,

1939. doi: 10.1103/PhysRev.55.418.

F. W. Aston. The constitution of the elements. Nature, 104:393, 1919.

doi: 10.1038/104393b0.

F. W. Aston. Recent results obtained with the mass-spectrograph. Na-

ture, 113:856, 1924. doi: 10.1038/113856a0.

G. Audi, F. G. Kondev, Meng Wang, W.J. Huang, and S. Naimi. The

NUBASE2016 evaluation of nuclear properties. Chinese Physics C, 41:
030001, 2017. doi: 10.1088/1674-1137/41/3/030001.

H. Becquerel. Sur les radiations émises par phosphorescence. Comptes

Rendes, 122:420, 1896. URL https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/
bpt6k30780.

N. Bohr. Neutron Capture and Nuclear Constitution. Nature, 137

(3461):344, 1936. doi: 10.1038/137344a0.

N. Bohr and J.A. Wheeler. The mechanism of nuclear fission. Phys.

Rev., 56:426, 1939. doi: 10.1103/PhysRev.56.426.

B.A. Brown. Lecture notes in nuclear structure physics, 2005.

URL https://people.nscl.msu.edu/%7Ebrown/Jina-workshop/
BAB-lecture-notes.pdf.

E.M. Burbidge, G.R. Burbidge, W.A. Fowler, and F. Hoyle. Synthesis of

the Elements in Stars. Reviews of Modern Physics, 29:547, 1957. doi:
10.1103/RevModPhys.29.547.

A.G.W. Cameron. Nuclear Reactions in Stars and Nucleogenesis. Pub-

lications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 69:201, 1957. doi:
10.1086/127051.

J. Chadwick. Possible Existence of a Neutron. Nature, 129:312, 1932.

doi: 10.1038/129312a0.
14 atomic nuclei

J.D. Cockcroft, E. T. S. Walton, and E. Rutherford. Experiments with

high velocity positive ions. II. the disintegration of elements by high
velocity protons. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series A,
137:229, 1932. doi: 10.1098/rspa.1932.0133.

A. S. Eddington. The internal constitution of the stars. The Observatory,

43:341, 1920. URL https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1920Obs.
...43..341E.

A. Einstein. Ist die trägheit eines körpers von seinem energiein-

halt abhängig? Annalen der Physik, 323:639, 1905. doi:
10.1002/andp.19053231314.

J. Erler, N. Birge, M. Kortelainen, W. Nazarewicz, E. Olsen, A.M. Per-

hac, and M. Stoitsov. The limits of the nuclear landscape. Nature,
486:509, 2012. doi: 10.1038/nature11188.

E. Fermi. Tentativo di una Teoria Dei Raggi β. Il Nuovo Cimento, 11:

1–19, 1934. doi: 10.1007/BF02959820.

G. Gamow. Zur quantentheorie des atomkernes. Zeitschrift fur Physik,

51:204, 1928. doi: 10.1007/BF01343196.

G. Gamow. Mass defect curve and nuclear constitution. Proceed-

ings of the Royal Society of London Series A, 126:632, 1930. doi:
10.1098/rspa.1930.0032.

O. Hahn and F. Strassmann. Über den Nachweis und das Verhal-

ten der bei der Bestrahlung des Urans mittels Neutronen entste-
henden Erdalkalimetalle. Naturwissenschaften, 27:11, 1939. doi:
10.1007/BF01488241.

W. Hauser and H. Feshbach. The Inelastic Scattering of Neutrons.

Physical Review, 87:366, 1952. doi: 10.1103/PhysRev.87.366.

O. Haxel, J.H.D. Jensen, and H.E. Suess. On the "magic numbers" in

nuclear structure. Physical Review, 75:1766, 1949. doi: 10.1103/Phys-
Rev.75.1766.2.

W. Heisenberg. Über den bau der atomkerne. i. Zeitschrift fur Physik,

77:1, 1932. doi: 10.1007/BF01342433.

W.D. Loveland, D.J. Morrissey, and G.T. Seaborg. Modern Nuclear

Chemistry. Wiley, 2006.

B.R. Martin. Nuclear and Particle Physics. 2006.

M.G. Mayer. On closed shells in nuclei. II. Physical Review, 75:1969,

1949. doi: 10.1103/PhysRev.75.1969.
 bibliography 15

Z. Meisel. Extension of the nuclear mass surface for neutron-rich isotopes of

argon through iron. PhD thesis, Michigan State University, 2015. URL
https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015PhDT........28M.

Z. Meisel. From dripline to dripline: Nuclear astrophysics in the lab-

oratory. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 742:012019, 2016. doi:
10.1088/1742-6596/742/1/012019.

L. Meitner and O.R. Frisch. Disintegration of Uranium by Neutrons:

a New Type of Nuclear Reaction. Nature, 143:239, 1939. doi:
10.1038/143239a0.

P. Moller, J.R. Nix, W.D. Myers, and W.J. Swiatecki. Nuclear ground-
state masses and deformations. Atomic Data and Nuclear Data Tables,
59:185, 1995. doi: https://doi.org/10.1006/adnd.1995.1002.

E. Rutherford. The scattering of alpha and beta particles by matter and

the structure of the atom. Philisophical Magazine, 21:669, 1911. doi:
10.1080/14786440508637080.

E. Rutherford. Radioactivity: Old and New. Nature, 135:289, 1935. doi:

10.1038/135289a0.

C. Scheidenberger, G. Bollen, F. Herfurth, A. Kellerbauer, H.-J. Kluge,

M. Koizumi, S. Schwarz, and L. Schweikhard. Production and trap-
ping of carbon clusters for absolute mass measurements at isoltrap.
Nuclear Physics A, 701:574, 2002. doi: 10.1016/S0375-9474(01)01647-
5.

J.J. Thomson. Bakerian lecture: Rays of positive electricity. Pro-

ceedings of the Royal Society of London Series A, 89:1, 1913. doi:
10.1098/rspa.1913.0057.

M. Wang, G. Audi, A.H. Wapstra, F.G. Kondev, M. MacCormick, X. Xu,

and B. Pfeiffer. The AME2012 atomic mass evaluation. Chinese
Physics C, 36:1603, 2012. doi: 10.1088/1674-1137/36/12/003.

M. Wang, G. Audi, F. G. Kondev, W.J. Huang, S. Naimi, and X. Xu.

The AME2016 atomic mass evaluation (II). tables, graphs and ref-
erences. Chinese Physics C, 41:030003, 2017. doi: 10.1088/1674-
1137/41/3/030003.

C. F. v. Weizsäcker. Zur theorie der kernmassen. Zeitschrift für Physik,

96:431, 1935. doi: 10.1007/BF01337700.

L. Wolfenstein. Conservation of Angular Momentum in the Statistical

Theory of Nuclear Reactions. Physical Review, 82:690, 1951. doi:
10.1103/PhysRev.82.690.
16 atomic nuclei

C.S. Wu, E. Ambler, R.W. Hayward, D.D. Hoppes, and R.P. Hudson.
Experimental Test of Parity Conservation in Beta Decay. Physical
Review, 105:1413, 1957. doi: 10.1103/PhysRev.105.1413.
Index

α-decay, 6, 11 isomer, 5 mass excess, 9

β-decay, 9, 11
level density, 11
binding energy, 9, 10 single particle states, 10
liquid drop, 6, 10, 11
spin, 6, 11
charge radius, 6
magic numbers, 8, 10, 11
fission, 6, 11 mass defect, 9 valley of stability, 8, 9