Ernest Rutherford Hans Geiger Ernest Marsden

 A New Zealand-born A German physicist. He is best An English-New Zealand

British physicist who known as the co-inventor of the physicist. worked under
came to be known as detector component of the Ernest Rutherford, which led
the father of nuclear Geiger counter and for the to the discovery of new
physics. Geiger–Marsden expt. which theories on the structure of
discovered the atomic nucleus. the atom.
 Nobel Prize in Physics in 1963

Maria Goeppert Mayer  Eugene Paul "E. P." Wigner 

Johannes Hans Daniel
(June 28, 1906 – Feb 20, (Nov 17, 1902 – Jan 1, 1995)
Jensen (25 June 1907 – 11
1972) was a German-born was a Hungarian-American 
Feb 1973) was a German 
American  theoretical physicist and
nuclear physicist. Jensen
theoretical physicist, and  mathematician.
shared half
Nobel laureate in Physics "for his contributions to the
of the 1963 Nobel Prize for
 for proposing the  theory of the atomic nucleus &
Physics with 
nuclear shell model of the  the elementary particles,
Maria Goeppert-Mayer for
atomic nucleus. particularly through the
their proposal of the 
nuclear shell model. Discovery & application of
fundamental symmetry principles”
Shell Model Potential

1st step in developing the shell model is the choice of the pot., and we
begin by considering 2 pot.s for which we solved the 3D SWE:
the infinite well and the harmonic oscillator.

The energy levels we obtained are shown in Figure 5.4.

As in the case of atomic physics, the degeneracy of each level is the

number of nucleons that can be put in each level, namely 2(2l+ 1).

The factor of (2l+ 1) arises from the ml degeneracy, and the additional
factor of 2 comes from the ms degeneracy.

As in atomic physics, we use spectroscopic notation to label the levels, with

one important exception:

the index n is not the principal quantum number, but simply counts the
number of levels with that l value.
Thus 1d means the first (lowest) d state, 2d means the second,
and so on. (In atomic spectroscopic notation, there are no 1d or 2d
states.)

Figure 5.4 also shows the occupation number of each level and the
cumulative number of nucleons that would correspond to the filling
of major shells. (Neutrons and protons, being non-identical particles,
are counted separately.
Thus the 1s level can hold 2 protons as well
as 2 neutrons.)

It is encouraging to see the magic numbers of 2, 8, and 20

emerging in both of these schemes, but the higher levels do not
correspond at all to the observed magic numbers.
In 1948, Maria Goeppert Mayer and O. Haxel (USA), J.H.D. Jensen and H.E. Suess
(Germany) brought together a considerable amount of convincing information
showing the evidence for the closed shells, which led to the development of nuclear
shell model that could explain all the magic numbers, namely 2, 8, 20, 28, 50, 82
and 126, which apparently represent closed shells in the nucleus.

Some of the main aspects of this evidence based on the study of stable nuclei are as
under:

1. Binding energy per nucleon vs. A curve. If we plot binding energy per nucleon
versus A curve, it shows that binding energy suddenly increases when the number
of nucleons is either 2, 8, 20, 28, 50, 82 or 126 indicating that these nuclei are
exceptionally stable.

2. Number of stable isotopes. Relative stabilities of different elements are also

indicated by the number of stable isotopes per element.
1. 19 K=3 2. Ca = 6
20 3. Sc = 1
21

4. In = 2
49 5. Sn = 10
50 6. 51 Sb = 2

7. Tl = 2
81 8. 82 Pb = 4 9. 83 Bi = 1
It is clear that number of stable isotopes for z = 20, 50 and 82 are much larger
compared to neighbouring isotopes.
3. Number of stable isotones.
The numbers of stable isotones for N = 19, 20, 21; 49, 50, 51 and 81, 82, 83 are
shown in Table below:

It is clear from the above table that the numbers of stable isotones for N = 20, 50 and 82
are much larger as compared to neighbouring stable isotones.
4. A table of relative abundances of nuclei compiled from data on the
composition of earth, sun, stars and meteorites shows pronounced peaks at

16
O (N = Z = 8)
40
Ca (N = Z = 20)
118
Sn (Z = 50)
88
Sr, 89Y, 90Zr (N = 50)
138
Ba, 139La, 140Ce (N = 82)
208
Pb (Z = 82, N = 126)
5. Binding energy of next neutron after a magic number is small. The separation energy
of the last neutron for N = 7, 8, 9; 19, 20, 21 and 27, 28 29 is shown in Table 2.4.

Table 2.4 Binding energy of the last neutron around magic numbers

From the above table it is clear that for neutron numbers = 9, 21 and 29, the
separation energy of the last neutron suddenly decreases as compared to the case,
when neutron numbers are 8, 20 and 28.

6. It is found that some isotopes are spontaneous neutron emitters.

They are: 17O, 81Kr, 137Xe, 89Kr
7. Decay product of radioactive series:

Thorium 232Th 1.4 x 1010 y(4n series) 208Pb126

Uranium 238U 4.51 x 109 y(4n + 2 series) 206Pb124

Actinium 235U 7.07 x 108 y(4n + 3 series) 207Pb125

Neptunium 237Np 2.25 x106 y(4n + 1 series) 209Bi126

The end product of each series ends in N or Z equal to either 82 or 126.

8. Neutron absorption cross-section: s, the probability of absorption of neutron by

the nucleus is small for nuclides containing magic number of neutrons
N 19 20 21 49 50 51
s 2.0 0.41 12.0 19.0 0.65 6.4

Thus all the facts given above show that magic numbers 2, 8, 20, 28, 50, 82 and 126
correspond to closed shells. The nuclei having any one of these magic number of
protons or neutrons or both show more stability than the other nuclei.
Basic Assumptions of the Shell Model

Calculations similar to atoms were performed for the nucleus.

Following assumptions were made for these calculations:

Nucleons in a nucleus move independently in a common (mean) potential

determined by the average motion of all the other nucleons.

Protons and neutrons separately fill levels in the nucleus.

Most of the nucleons are paired and a pair of nucleons contributes zero spin and
zero magnetic moment. The paired nucleons thus form an inert core.

The properties of odd-A nuclei are characterized by the unpaired nucleon and
odd–odd nuclei by the unpaired proton and neutron.

These assumptions indicate that the nucleus might have a shell structure.

It means that nucleons moving in different shells inside the nucleus do not suffer any
collisions similar to electrons in different shells in the atom.
This assumption is apparently not acceptable as the nucleons have almost the same size as
that of the nucleus.

So obviously a question arises, why do not so many nucleons moving inside the nucleus
suffer any collisions?

How can we regard the nucleons as moving in well-defined orbits when a single nucleon
can make many collisions during each orbit?

The answer to this question comes from Pauli’s exclusion principle.

Consider in a heavy nucleus, a collision between two nucleons in a state near the very
bottom of the potential well.

When the nucleons collide, they transfer energy to one another, but if all of the energy
levels are filled up to the level of valence nucleon, there is no way for one of the nucleons
to gain energy except to move up to the valence level.
The other levels near the original level are filled and cannot accept an additional nucleon.

Such a transfer from a low-lying level to the higher-lying level requires more energy than
the nucleons are likely to transfer in a collision.

Thus, the collisions cannot occur and the nucleons can indeed orbit as if they were
transparent to one another!
Achievements of the Shell Model

• ground state spin and parities of all even–even nuclei without any exception.
• ground state spin and parities of most of odd A (even–odd or odd–even) nuclei.
• spin and parities of odd–odd nuclei.
• extra stability of magic nuclei.
• qualitative features of magnetic dipole and electric quadrupole moments of
different nuclei.
• many other properties, like nuclear isomerism of different nuclei.

Failures of Shell Model

• Shell model fails to explain spin values for certain nuclei.

• unable to explain the energy of first excited states in even–even nuclei.
• unable to explain magnetic moments of some nuclei.
• This model is also unable to explain quadrupole moments of many nuclei.
• the ground states of odd A nuclei in the mass region 150 < A < 190 and A > 220.
(1s1/2)2
(1p3/2)4 (1p1/2)2
(1d5/2)6 (2s1/2)2 (1d3/2)4
(1f7/2)8
(2p3/2)4 (1f5/2)6 (2p1/2)2 (1g9/2)10
(1g7/2)8 (2d5/2)6 (2d3/2)4 (3s1/2)2 (1h11/2)12

Level scheme due to spin-orbit coupling.

 1s1/2 2
1p3/2, 1p1/2 8
1d5/2, 2s1/2, 1d3/2 20
1f7/2 28
2p3/2, 1f5/2, 2p1/2, 1g9/2 50
1g7/2, 2d5/2, 2d3/2, 3s1/2, 1h11/2 82
1h9/2, 2f7/2, 2f5/2, 3p3/2, 3p1/2, 1i13/2 126
2g9/2, 3d5/2, 1i11/2, 2g7/2, 4s1/2, 3d3/2, 1j15/2 184

The parity of the system is given by (–1)l , where l is the orbital quantum
number of the last odd nucleon.

For a nucleon in a state

s, d, g, … corresponding to l = 0, 2, 4, … the parity is even (+),

while for
the states p, f, h, … corresponding to l = 1, 3, 5, … the parity is odd (–).
The other potential, which is a compromise between square well and harmonic
oscillator potential, is

This potential is known as Woods–Saxon potential.

In this equation d = 0.524 fm, R is the mean nuclear

radius and r = r0 A1/3.

Unlike square well potential, the Woods–Saxon

potential does not have any sharp edges at all.
The harmonic oscillator potential also does not have
any edges.

The shape of this potential is shown in Figure.

This potential closely approximates the nuclear charge and matter distribution, falling
smoothly to zero beyond the mean radius R.
When the Schrödinger equation was solved for this potential, it predicted 2, 8, 20, 40,
58, 92, 112 as magic numbers.
We again get the magic numbers 2, 8, and 20, but the higher magic numbers do not
emerge from the calculations.
Magnetic Dipole Moment

Magnetic dipole moment of the nucleus arises due to the motion of charged
particles. Orbital and spin angular momenta of protons produce magnetic field within
the nucleus. This field can be described in terms of resultant magnetic dipole moment
located at the centre of the nucleus.

Particle having a charge q and mass m circulates with speed v in a circular orbit of
radius r. If it has a time period t, then the current i associated with the charge q is

Now magnetic dipole moment m for current i around an area of the loop A is given as
m = i x A; A = πr2. Substituting the values of i and A, we have
Considering the case of a single electron atom and taking q to be electronic charge e
and multiplying and dividing the above equation by electron mass m, we have
Shell Model prediction of the
magic numbers.
Level splittings due to h.o.
levels, l-quantum number and
spin-orbit coupling.

Notice that further variations

in the position of the levels are
actually present (see Krane
Fig. 5.6). Here only the
shiftings leading to new shell
groupings are shown.
These predictions do not depend on the exact shape of the square well potential, but
only on the spin-orbit coupling and its relative strength to the nuclear interaction V 0
as set in the harmonic oscillator potential (we had seen that the separation between
oscillator levels was on the order of 10MeV.)

In practice, if one studies in more detail the potential well, one finds that the
oscillator levels with higher l are lowered with respect to the others, thus enhancing
the gap created by the spin-orbit coupling. The shell model that we have just
presented is quite a simplified model. However it can make many predictions about
the nuclide properties.

For example it predicts the nuclear spin and parity, the magnetic dipole moment and
electric quadrupole moment, and it can even be used to calculate the probability of
transitions from one state to another as a result of radioactive decay or nuclear
reactions.
Shell Model energy
levels (from Krane
Fig. 5.6).

Left: Calculated
energy levels based on
potential. To the right
of each level are its
capacity and
cumulative number of
nucleons up to that
level. The spin-orbit
interaction splits the
levels with l> 0 into
two new levels.

Note that the shell

effect is quite
apparent, and magic
numbers are
reproduced exactly.
The shell model with pairing force predicts a nuclear spin I = 0 and parity Π =even (or
IΠ =0+) for all even-even nuclides.

A. Odd-Even nuclei
Despite its crudeness, the shell model with the spin-orbit correction describes well the
spin and parity of all odd-A nuclei. In particular, all odd-A nuclei will have half-
integer spin(since the nucleons, being fermions, have half-integer spin).

Example:

15
O7 and 178 O9. (of course 16O has spin zero and even parity because all the nucleons
8
are paired). The first (15 8 O7)has an unpaired neutron in the p1/2 shell, than l = 1, s =1/2
and we would predict the isotope to have spin 1/2 and odd parity.

The ground state of 178 O9 instead has the last unpaired neutron in the d5/2 shell, with l
=2 and s =5/2, thus implying a spin 5/2 with even parity. Both these predictions are
confirmed by experiments.
Figure 6.3
Energy level pattern and
spectroscopic labeling of states
from the schematic shell
model. The angular momentum
coupling is indicated at the left
side and the numbers of nucleons
needed to fill each orbital and
each shell are shown on the right
side.

From M. G. Mayer and

J. H. D. Jenson, Elementary Theory
of Nuclear Shell Structure, Wiley,
New York, 1955.
The shell model can also be used to predict the ground-state spins and parities of
odd-proton/odd-neutron nuclei by combining the individual jπ values of the two
unpaired particles.
Notice that two combinations will always be possible, and we will need a way to
decide which of the two alignments of the total-nucleon angular momenta will be lower
in energy (i.e., be the ground state).

The ground state of the deuteron with its single proton and single neutron provides the
key to this selection.

The spin angular momenta of the neutron and proton are aligned in the deuteron
ground state, thus for the ground state of an odd–odd nucleus we should couple the
total j values so that the intrinsic spins of the odd particles are aligned.

We can do this by inspection of the angular momenta or by applying a set of rules

based on the systematics of the shell model orbitals.
Brennan and Bernstein (1960) have summarized these data in the form of three rules.
When the odd nucleons are both particles or holes in their respective subshells, rule 1

states that when j1 ¼ l1 +1=2 and j2 ¼ l2 +1=2, then J ¼ jj1 j2j. Rule 2 states
that when j1 ¼ l1 +1=2 and j2 ¼ l2 +1=2, then J ¼ jj1 +j2j. Rule 3 states that
for configurations in which the odd nucleons are a combination of particles and
holes, such as 36Cl, J ¼ j1 þ j2 þ 1.
Valence Nucleons

Summary
The shell model, despite its simplicity, is successful in predicting the spins and parities
of nearly all odd-A ground states.

The shell modelis less successful, but sometimes still satisfactory, in predicting
the magnetic dipole and quadrupole moments.

The particular application of the shell model that we have considered is known as
the extreme independent particle model

Its basic assumption is that all nucleons but one are paired, and the nuclear properties arise from the motion
of the single unpaired nucleons

Hence, this is obviously an oversimplification, and as a next better approximation we treat all
of the nucleons in the unfilled subshell.

Let us study the excited states of 178O9 and 179F8?

If the extreme independent particle shell model were valid, we should be able
to reproduce the right excited states???
 2.5. Valence Nucleons and Excited States
Let us study the excited states of 178O9 and 179F8. each of which has only one nucleon
beyond a doubly magic (Z=8, N=8)
Ground State: OK

Shell model gives the right

Value: 5/2+

Observed Excited
States
Excited states: Discrepancy!
Based on extreme shell model,
we expect the first two excited
states to be: 1/2+ and 3/2+
This means that when we add energy
to nucleus, the core remains inert and
the odd nucleon absorbs the energy and
moves to higher shell model levels

The expected 1/2+ shell-model state appears

as the first excited state, and the 3/2+ state
is much higher, but how can we account
for 1/2- and 3/2- , and 5/2- ?

A possible explanation?
 2.5. Valence Nucleons and Excited States
Let us study the excited states of 178O9 and 179F8. each of which has only one nucleon
beyond a doubly magic (Z=8, N=8)
The expected 1/2+ shell-model state appears
as the first excited state, and the 3/2+ state
is much higher, but how can we account
for 1/2- and 3/2- , and 5/2- ?

Negative parity 2p1/2, 2p3/2, and 1f5/2

shell-model states are well above
the 1d3/2 state.
Instead of exciting the odd nucleon
to higher state, we break the pair in the
1p1/2 level and excite one of the nucleons
to pair with nucleon in d5/2

A similar assumption may be done for Because the pairing energy increases with l,
the explanation for the 3/2- It is actually energetically favorable to break
an l=1 pair and form an l=2 pair

HOWEVER, still the 5/2- state

can not be explained!!? ????????
2.5. Valence Nucleons
This case illustrate the difference between the complete shell model
and its extreme independent particle limit
41Ca and 41Sn nuclei have only a single nucleon beyond a doubly magic…(20,20)

As expected, in 41Ca and 41Sc nuclei,

the ground state corresponds to 7/2-
and the first excited state is 3/2- , 2p3/2

The first excited state is about 2Mev…

 2.5. Valence Nucleons
A more striking case: 43Ca that has 3 nucleons in the last shell: 1f7/2
We see many more low-lying states that come from??? The coupling of these particles in 1f7/2 shell

This clearly shows the diff. between the complete shell model and the extreme independent particle limit!!!

If only the odd particule were important, 43Ca should be similar to 41Ca (has only one odd nucleon)!!??

In 43Sn (one single proton and two neutrons),

you can see how the 21st and 22nd
neutrons have a great effect on the structure

In 43Ti (one single neutron and two protons),

you can see how the 21st and 22nd
protonss have a great effect on shell-model
level of the 21st neutron.

Conclusion:
Excited states of nucleus are determined
by taking into account not only the odd
nucleon but all the valence nucleons
38
3. Even-z, Even-N Nuclei and Collective Structure

Goal: understand the structure of nuclei with even numbers of protons and neutrons

As example: 13050Sn that has 50 protons filling g9/2 and 80 neutrons

filling h11/2 with a lack of 2 neutrons from magic

As expected, the shell model predicts that all even-even nuclei

will have 0+ ground state because all nucleons are paired Goal: How to interpret
the observed excited states?
3. Even-z, Even-N Nuclei and Collective Structure

To form an excited state: 1) Break one of the pairs

2) Excite a nucleon to higher level
3) The coupling between the two odd nucleons determine spin and parity

However, promoting one of g9/2 protons or h11/2 neutrons to higher level requires a great deal of energy

Because the gap between the major shells, of the order of 2 Mev, must be crossed
Therefore, we expect that the major components of the wave functions of the lower excited states
will consist of neutron excitation within the last occupied major shell.
3. Even-z, Even-N Nuclei and Collective Structure

Hence, an excited state can be formed by breaking, for instance, s1/2 and promoting
one of the s1/2 neutrons to the h11/2 subshell.

The propery of such system would be determined mainly by the coupling of the s 1/2 and
the unpaired h11/2 neutron

Hence possible angular momentum resultants are: 11/2 +1/2 =6 and 11/2 – 1/2 =5
3. Even-z, Even-N Nuclei and Collective Structure

Another possibility, an excited state can be formed by breaking, for instance, d3/2 and promoting
one of the d3/2 neutrons to the h11/2 subshell.

The propery of such system would be determined mainly by the coupling of the d 3/2 and
the unpaired h11/2 neutron

Hence possible angular momentum resultants are: 11/2 +3/2 =7 and 11/2 – 3/2 =4

s with parity even and h with parity odd

hence coupling with parity odd

We see indeed many excited states with odd parity and

spins in the range 4-7 with energies about 2 Mev characteristic
of what is needed to break a pair and excite a particule
within a shell

Hence we have a strong indication

that we understood those states!!
3. Even-z, Even-N Nuclei and Collective Structure

Another possibility, would be to break a pair of neutrons in h 11/2 and keeping both member of pair
in h11/2 subshell.
According to the angular momentum rules:
Hence possible angular momentum resultants are: 11/2 +11/2 =11 and 11/2 – 11/2 =0

But because they must be treated as identical particules symmertric wave function possible: 0+, 2+, 4+, 6+, 8+, 10+

We see indeed many excited states corresponding to this case

with energies about 2 Mev

Here again, the shell model seems to give us

a reasonable description of the level structure
3. Even-z, Even-N Nuclei and Collective Structure

But How can we interpret the level??? About 1.2 Mev!!!

To 2+ spin/parity can be obtained through many possiblities: case of neutron states:

two h11/2 neutron can couple to get the 2+, exciting of a pair of d3/2 to h11/2 subshell,
then break the coupling of the two remaining d3/2 neutrons and recouple them to 2+,……. :

However, in all these possiblities we must first break a pair, and thus the resulting
states would be expected at about 2 Mev?!
Hence, all these possibilities can not explain
the observed excite state at 1.2 Mev
3. Even-z, Even-N Nuclei and Collective Structure

But How can we interpret the level??? About 1.2 Mev!!!

May be this is only an accident for the case 130Sn????

NO, hundereds of known even-even nuclei have been examied and it was concluded that each case
has an excited state 2+ at energy below one half of the energy required to break a pair!!!!!

In all but very few cases, this 2+ state is the lowest excited state!

Hence, it is a general property of even-Z, even-N nuclei,

valid throughout the entire mass range

Shell model fails to predict this excited state??

Hence, it is clear that such state can not be

identified with the motion of a few valence
nucleons but instead it is necessary
to take into account the entire nucleus

Collective Properties