Talk:Nuclear shell model

message: I noticed that the image used on this page is the same as is used on the hyperphysics page. http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/nuclear/shell.html
Is this image legit? I do not know how to check for myself.  [Tycho?] 03:04, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright? 

message: Is there a reason this article is at Shell model instead of Nuclear shell model?  The latter seems more descriptive, and more analogous to Atomic shell model.  Would anyone object to a move?  --Doradus 19:39, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oops... Ironically, atomic shell model is actually at electron configuration.  --Doradus 19:58, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

text: I see your point.  Nuclear physicists generally just call it 'the shell model', Krane refers to it as such [].  I think in an encyclopedia it might be best if it were under 'Nuclear Shell Model', but a move is nowhere near as urgent as the need for the contents of the article to receive a great deal of attention!  At the minute it is not a great article, no matter what the title is.Mumby 16:08, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Title 

message: ... (comment from recent edit) ... so this needs to be taken into account in the article in other places too. Not being a nuclear physicist, I leave this to the experts. --TraceyR (talk) 09:58, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutrons are indistinguishable ... 

message: Can someone explain why the article says that the upper magic number for protons is 114 when 114 is not a magic number? --Ben Best (talk) 15:16, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Upper magic number for protons 

message: The 2d shell splits to two 1d shells in the image. That doesn't seem right. Therealmaddox (talk) 02:49, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: You are right -- it's a misprint. Bakken (talk) 09:10, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image Error 

message: In the following text, n is clearly not the shell number, but neither is it the quantum number of the harmonic potential (which should be be n=1 for the =7/2 4th shell, as in the figure). So what is it? I would propose to keep that same n everywhere.
* 1st Shell: 2 states (n = 0, j = 1/2).
* 2nd Shell: 6 states (n = 1, j = 1/2 or 3/2).
* 3rd shell: 12 states (n = 2, j = 1/2, 3/2 or 5/2).
* 4th shell: 8 states (n = 3, j = 7/2).
* 5th shell: 22 states (n = 3, j = 1/2, 3/2 or 5/2; n = 4, j = 9/2)...
Jor63 (talk) 13:39, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is n? 

message: I see nothing about the binding energy of the nuclei. Does it mean that the shell model is unable to calculate it?
It seems that there exists no other model able to do it except mine, as shown in my Glasgow presentation(http://storage.canalblog.com/59/81/292736/64343067.pdf) and in my paper http://www.springerlink.com/content/h673n477n243vu46/.
Bernard Schaeffer (talk) 07:58, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Binding energy of the nuclei

message: Is anyone able to expand on the Alpha Particle Model section?  I feel that it ought to either give more information than it does, or alternatively link to a relevant explanation on another page.  I know too little to be sure of linking it to the right place, I'm afraid. EdwardRussell (talk) 14:52, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alpha Particle Model 

message: For the simple harmonic oscillator model of energy levels, the magic numbers predicted are all doubled tetrahedral numbers, thus: 2,8,20,40,70,112,168,240... Presumably doubled since pairs of nucleons are bound by opposing spin.
It turns out that for biaxially deformed nuclei under the harmonic oscillator the magic numbers are all variations on this theme, through Pascal Triangle combinatorics. If deformation is defined by the oscillator ratio, with numerator related to the polar radius and the the denominator the equatorial, then the numerator defines how many copies of a doubled triangular number interval are added to the growing total to make magics. The denominator, on the other hand, defines how many magic numbers have to be passed to give a doubled triangular number interval between the target magics. Issues only occur where the total number of magics hasn't yet reached the minimum needed. Then doubled natural numbers can be used to fill in this region. Within this limited domain there are no exceptions and the results match theory exactly. 71.127.246.169 (talk) 17:51, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Magic numbers and the harmonic oscillator 

message: Before the subsection "Predicted magic numbers", the harmonic oscillator and its quantum numbers are discussed. For the three-dimensional harmonic oscillator, n ≤ l. However, in the subsection "Predicted magic numbers" and the corresponding image, l can suddenly assume values much larger than n (e.g. 1d, 1f, 1g...). There is no clear explanation for this. Maybe it can be added? Socob (talk) 19:20, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Section "Predicted magic numbers": Explanation vor l > n 

message: Spin-orbit coupling causes highest spin spin-split orbital partials to fall in energy, eventually enough to start being incorporated into the preceding period analogue.
The effect starts to become pronounced with the inclusion of 1g9/2, with 10 nucleons. In terms of total neutron or proton count, this fall is 2 nucleons. The pure harmonic oscillator magic number would be 40 (double tetrahedral number), but with the addition of these 10 nucleons into the previous shell, total count now becomes 50, which is the observed spin-orbit magic number. The DEPTH of insertion is 2 nucleons- that is 1g9/2 starts after 38 (40-2) and ends at 48 (50-2).
The next intruder is 1h11/2, with 12 nucleons. This orbital partial starts after 64 and ends at 76, with 'depth' 6- that is harmonic oscillator magic (double tetrahedral) 70-6=64 and spin-orbit magic 82-6=76.
After this comes 1i13/2, with 14 nucleons. Depth is 12. That is, harmonic oscillator magic 112 (double tetrahedral)-12=100, and the intruder starts after this point. It ends at spin-orbit magic 126-12=114.
Finally, within known nuclei, 1j15/2, with 16 nucleons. Harmonic oscillator magic 168-20=148... while spin-orbit magic 184-20=164
For neutrons these sequences are without exception as regards intruder positioning according to Nobelists such as Maria Goeppert-Mayer. For protons they work up to 1i13/2, and this failure is only one option, since there is an energy level close enough to compete with the prevailing pattern as found with the neutrons.
Interestingly, the depth sequence 2,6,12,20... is that of doubled triangular numbers, from a value doubled Pascal Triangle.
Below magic number 50 depth of intrusion is zero, which means that the highest spin-split orbital partial simply rides on top of the previous shell.
MAYER, M. G., and J. H. D. JENSEN: Elementary Theory of Nuclear Shell Structure. New York: Wiley Publishing Co. 1955
108.5.120.133 (talk) 23:47, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spin-orbit intruders 

message: ===Section References===
In the early 1900s, scientists discovered that atoms were not indivisible after all. In fact, they found that atoms were made up of smaller particles called protons and neutrons. This discovery led to a revolution in our understanding of the atom. Shaaam1 (talk) 04:13, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please create some 3D renditions of '''nuclear shell models''' and upload them 

message: In the early 1900s, scientists discovered that atoms were not indivisible after all. In fact, they found that atoms were made up of smaller particles called protons and neutrons. This discovery led to a revolution in our understanding of the atom. Shaaam1 (talk) 04:13, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Section References

message: Hey hi howdy all; I've added a basic empirical shell gap graph, and can't help but notice there are no references to this formula. Considering how abundantly clear this makes nuclear shells from what is effectively just AME data, this should be included; are there other articles which reference this, or should I throw it in somewhere in the article? Mia Dobson (talk) 15:30, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Empirical shell gap? 

message: As I understand the spherically-symmetric three-dimensional harmonic oscillator is modified by adding spin-orbit interaction and changing the profile of the (spherical-symmetric) potential to a more realistic one. And therewith the shells matching the magic-numbers are found.
I see similarity with the orbits of electrons (clouds). In that model the electrons are attracted to the protons in the kernel via the electric field. This electric field causes the spherical-symmetric potential V(r). 
What is the source of the potential in the nuclear shell model? And how does this attracts protons and neutrons? And also, why is the changed profile more realistic?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Raetox (talk • contribs) 23:04, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Modified harmonic oscillator model 

message: Just wanted to let y'all know that this article was mentioned in this YouTube vid, at timestamp 27:30. It gives a correction (which has been actioned) and jokingly suggests that the video should be cited as a source (and then tells the audience not to). Just in case any mischief is afoot. Sojup (talk) 14:52, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  YouTube video mention