arXiv 2005.131972020-05-27nucl-thnucl-ex

$^{48}$ Ca的中子皮与皮肤实验数据一致

Neutron skin of $^{48}$Ca consistent with experimental data on skins

Shingo Tagami, Jun Matsui, Maya Takechi, Masanobu Yahiro

摘要：

【背景】：在我们以前的论文中，我们预测$r_{\rm skin}$，$r_{\rm p}$，$r_{\rm n}$，$r_{\rm m}$为$^{40-60,62,64}$钙后，确定中子滴线，使用Gogny-D1 S HFB有和没有角动量投影（AMP）。我们发现AMP的影响很小。最近，田中{ \it et al.}测量$^{42-51}$ Ca的相互作用截面$σ_{\rm I}$，从$σ_{\rm I}$确定$r_{\rm m}$，并从$r_{\rm m}$和从电子散射评估的$r_{\rm p}(\rm {exp})$推导皮肤$r_{\rm skin}$和$r_{\rm n}$。比较我们的结果与数据，我们发现对于$^{42-48}$ Ca，GHFB和GHFB+AMP重现了$r_{\rm skin}$，$r_{\rm n}$，$r_{\rm m}$的数据，但对于$r_{\rm p}(\rm {exp})$没有。[Aim]：我们的目的是通过使用GHFB+AMP和约束GHFB（cGHFB）来确定$r_{\rm skin}^{48}$的值，其中计算值拟合到$r_{\rm p}(\rm {exp})$。[结果]：对$^{42,44,46,48}$ Ca，cGHFB几乎不改变$r_{\rm skin}$、$r_{\rm m}$、$r_{\rm n}$，但对$r_{\rm skin}^{48}$无影响。对于$r_{\rm skin}^{48}$，cGHFB结果为$r_{\rm skin}^{48}=0.190$ fm，而对于GHFB+AMP，为$r_{\rm skin}^{48}=0.159$ fm。我们应该取GHFB+AMP和cGHFB的上、下界。结果$r_{\rm skin}^{48}=0.159-0.190$ fm与从高分辨率$E1$极化率实验（$E1$ pE）获得的$r_{\rm skin}^{48}(σ_{\rm I})$和数据$r_{\rm skin}^{48}(\rm $ E1 $pE)$一致。使用具有强相关性的$r_{\rm skin}^{48}$ - $r_{\rm skin}^{208}$关系，[3]，我们将由PREX和$E1$ pE确定的数据$r_{\rm skin}^{208}$变换为相应的值$r_{\rm skin}^{48}(\rm tPREX)$和$r_{\rm skin}^{48}(\rm t$ E1 $pE)$。对于$r_{\rm skin}^{48}(\rm tPREX)$和$r_{\rm skin}^{48}(\rm t$ E1 $pE)$，我们的结果也是一致的。

英文摘要：

[Background]: In our previous paper, we predicted $r_{\rm skin}$, $r_{\rm p}$, $r_{\rm n}$, $r_{\rm m}$ for $^{40-60,62,64}$Ca after determining the neutron dripline, using the Gogny-D1S HFB with and without the angular momentum projection (AMP). We found that effects of the AMP are small. Very lately, Tanaka {\it et al.} measured interaction cross sections $σ_{\rm I}$ for $^{42-51}$Ca, determined $r_{\rm m}$ from the $σ_{\rm I}$, and deduced skin $r_{\rm skin}$ and $r_{\rm n}$ from the $r_{\rm m}$ and the $r_{\rm p}(\rm {exp})$ evaluated from the electron scattering. Comparing our results with the data, we find for $^{42-48}$Ca that GHFB and GHFB+AMP reproduce the data on $r_{\rm skin}$, $r_{\rm n}$, $r_{\rm m}$, but not for $r_{\rm p}(\rm {exp})$. [Aim]: Our purpose is to determine a value of $r_{\rm skin}^{48}$ by using GHFB+AMP and the constrained GHFB (cGHFB) in which the calculated value is fitted to $r_{\rm p}(\rm {exp})$. [Results]: For $^{42,44,46,48}$Ca, cGHFB hardly changes $r_{\rm skin}$, $r_{\rm m}$, $r_{\rm n}$ calculated with GHFB+AMP, except for $r_{\rm skin}^{48}$. For $r_{\rm skin}^{48}$, the cGHFB result is $r_{\rm skin}^{48}=0.190$fm, while $r_{\rm skin}^{48}=0.159$fm for GHFB+AMP. We should take the upper and the lower bound of GHFB+AMP and cGHFB. The result $r_{\rm skin}^{48}=0.159-0.190$fm consists with the $r_{\rm skin}^{48}(σ_{\rm I})$ and the data $r_{\rm skin}^{48}(\rm $E1$pE)$ obtained from high-resolution $E1$ polarizability experiment ($E1$pE). Using the $r_{\rm skin}^{48}$-$r_{\rm skin}^{208}$ relation with strong correlation of Ref.[3], we transform the data $r_{\rm skin}^{208}$ determined by PREX and $E1$pE to the corresponding values, $r_{\rm skin}^{48}(\rm tPREX)$ and $r_{\rm skin}^{48}(\rm t$E1$pE)$. Our result is consistent also for $r_{\rm skin}^{48}(\rm tPREX)$ and $r_{\rm skin}^{48}(\rm t$E1$pE)$.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来，可能存在错误，请以论文正文为准。

摘要：

英文摘要：

相关论文