This paper was converted on www.awesomepapers.org from LaTeX by an anonymous user.
Want to know more? Visit the Converter page.

Effect of finite nuclear size on the electric quadrupole hyperfine operator

V. A. Dzuba, V. V. Flambaum School of Physics, University of New South Wales, Sydney 2052, Australia
Abstract

We present an expression for the operator of the electric quadrupole hyperfine interaction which takes into account finite nuclear size. We compare the results obtained with the use of this operator with those obtained in the standard approach which ignores finite nuclear size. We found that the effect of changing operators on the hyperfine constant BB is small in hydrogen-like systems. There is a very significant enhancement of the effect in many-electron atoms caused by the contribution of the large s1/2d3/2,d5/2s_{1/2}-d_{3/2},d_{5/2} and p1/2p3/2p_{1/2}-p_{3/2} off diagonal matrix elements to the core polarisation, correlation and configuration interaction corrections. Similar enhancement takes place for transition amplitudes induced by the electric quadrupole hyperfine interaction.

I Introduction

The study of the hyperfine structure (hfs) in heavy and superheavy atomic systems is a valuable tool for obtaining the information about nuclei Sobelman ; Johnson . Comparing experimental hfs with theoretical calculations of the magnetic dipole hfs constants AA and electric quadrupole hfs constant BB allows extraction of the nuclear magnetic moment μ\mu and nuclear electric quadrupole moment QQ. Electric quadrupole QQ is strongly enhanced in deformed nuclei. This may serve as a guidance in the search for the nuclear stability island since the nuclei in the vicinity of the island are expected to be spherical (see, e.g. Oganessian ).

Effect of the finite nuclear size for the magnetic hfs constant AA has been extensively studied in numerous publications. It is sufficient to mention the Bohr-Weisscopf effect where constant AA is not exactly proportional to the nuclear magnetic moment since it also depends on the distribution of magnetization inside the nucleus - see e.g. BW1 ; BW2 ; Orozco ; BW3 ; BW4 ; BW5 ; BW6 ; BW7 ; Roberts and references therein. On the other hand, we are not aware of such study for the electric quadrupole hfs constant.

II Electric quadrupole operator

Standard operator of the electric quadrupole hfs interaction (the Q20Q_{20} component) has the form Sobelman ; Johnson

Q^=Y20/r3,\hat{Q}=Y_{20}/r^{3}, (1)

where Y20Y_{20} is the spherical function, rr is the distance to the nucleus. We omit here a coefficient which does not play any role in further discussion since we will discuss relative corrections to the hfs constant BB, i.e. δB/B\delta B/B. From the symmetry of the problem we conclude that the quadrupole electric field in the centre of the nucleus vanishes, 𝐄=ϕ=0{\bf E}=-{\bf\nabla}\phi=0. The vanishing gradient means that the quadrupole electrostatic potential near r=0r=0 is ϕr2Y20\phi\propto r^{2}Y_{20}. This leads us to a simple analytical form of the quadrupole operator which takes into account the finite nuclear radius RR:

Q^=F(r)Y20,\displaystyle\hat{Q}=F(r)Y_{20}, (2)
F(r)={r2/R5,rR1/r3,r>R\displaystyle F(r)=\left\{\begin{array}[]{ll}r^{2}/R^{5},&r\leq R\\ 1/r^{3},&r>R\end{array}\right. (5)

III Qualitative consideration of the finite nuclear size effect

Let us start from a qualitative consideration of the dependence of BB on the nuclear radius RR. Integrals in the matrix elements of the singular quadrupole operator (1) are dominated by small distances rr from the nucleus where we can neglect energy of an electron compare to the Coulomb potential and screening of the nuclear Coulomb potential by electrons. Solution of the radial Dirac equation in the Coulomb field for zero energy is expressed in terms of the Bessel functions Jγj(x)J_{\gamma_{j}}(x) and Jγj1(x)J_{\gamma_{j}-1}(x), where γj=(j+1/2)2Z2α2\gamma_{j}=\sqrt{(j+1/2)^{2}-Z^{2}\alpha^{2}}, jj is the electron angular momentum, ZZ is the nuclear charge, α\alpha is the fine structure constant, x=(8Zr/a)1/2x=(8Zr/a)^{1/2} is the dimensionless distance variable, aa is the Bohr radius- see e.g. Refs. Khriplovich ; FG . Therefore, the radial dependence of the charge density of an electron may be presented as

ρ(r)=Cnljr2f(x),\rho(r)=\frac{C_{nlj}}{r^{2}}f(x), (6)

where the normalisation constant CnljC_{nlj} may be omitted since it cancels out in the ratio δB/B\delta B/B, dimensionless function f(x)f(x) is expressed as products of Bessel functions. We can present matrix element of the operator (1) as

B0ρ(r)r3f(x)r2𝑑r=Cnlj(8Z/a)2I,\displaystyle B\sim\int_{0}^{\infty}\frac{\rho(r)}{r^{3}}f(x)r^{2}dr=C_{nlj}\left(8Z/a\right)^{2}I, (7)
I=20f(x)x3𝑑x1\displaystyle I=2\int_{0}^{\infty}\frac{f(x)}{x^{3}}dx\sim 1

Near the nucleus Bessel functions Jγj(x)J_{\gamma_{j}}(x) may be expanded for x1x\ll 1, and we have Khriplovich ; FG

ρ(r)=Cnlj(8Z/a)2γjr2(γj1).\rho(r)=C_{nlj}\left(8Z/a\right)^{2\gamma_{j}}r^{2(\gamma_{j}-1)}. (8)

If we use operator (2) instead of the singular operator (1), the contribution of the area inside the nucleus is significantly suppressed and this effect produces the change in the hfs constant BB,

δBCnlj0Rρ(r)r3f(x)r2𝑑r,\displaystyle\delta B\sim-C_{nlj}\int_{0}^{R}\frac{\rho(r)}{r^{3}}f(x)r^{2}dr,
δBB(RZa)2(γj1).\displaystyle\frac{\delta B}{B}\sim-\left(\frac{RZ}{a}\right)^{2(\gamma_{j}-1)}. (9)

We should note that Eq. (8) for the density ρ(r)\rho(r) is valid outside the nucleus where the nuclear Coulomb potential is equal to V(r)=Ze2/rV(r)=-Ze^{2}/r. However, practically all numerical calculations of hfs have actually taken into account finite size of the nucleus in the electron wave functions. Analytical calculations of the electron wave function in the finite size nucleus potential V(r)V(r) (instead of the point-like potential V(r)=Ze2/rV(r)=-Ze^{2}/r) have been done in Refs. Khriplovich ; FG . The main difference is that in the leading term ρ(r)r2j1\rho(r)\propto r^{2j-1} (instead of r2(γj1)r^{2(\gamma_{j}-1)}; the difference in power of rr is Z2α2/(j+1/2)\sim Z^{2}\alpha^{2}/(j+1/2)). Such modification of ρ(r)\rho(r) inside the nucleus produces coefficient 1\sim 1 in the estimate of δB/B\delta B/B and does not change any conclusions. This is easy to explain since the Coulomb wave function for r>Rr>R provides boundary condition at r=Rr=R for the solution inside the nucleus, therefore, the factor (RZa)2(γj1)\left(\frac{RZ}{a}\right)^{2(\gamma_{j}-1)} in the estimate of δB/B\delta B/B appears in any case.

The s1/2s_{1/2} and p1/2p_{1/2} electronic states have zero value of BB. Simple estimates for the states with total angular momentum j>1/2j>1/2 gives δB/B\delta B/B equal to a small fraction of per cent. Indeed, power of the small parameter RZ/aRZ/a in Eq. (9) is positive, from 2 for small ZαZ\alpha to 1.46 for ZZ=137. However, this naive estimate is only valid for the hydrogen-like single electron atoms.

In many-electron atoms the core polarization corrections and other correlation corrections contain large non-diagonal matrix elements of the hyperfine interaction such as s1/2|Q^|d3/2\langle s_{1/2}|\hat{Q}|d_{3/2}\rangle, s1/2|Q^|d5/2\langle s_{1/2}|\hat{Q}|d_{5/2}\rangle and p1/2|Q^|p3/2\langle p_{1/2}|\hat{Q}|p_{3/2}\rangle. These large non-diagonal matrix elements may strongly enhance effects of configuration mixing on BB. They are also responsible for the transition amplitudes induced by electric quadrupole hyperfine interaction - see, for example Ref. hfs-tr , where probabilities of E3 and M2 atomic clock transitions, which are transformed to E1 by the hfs operators, have been calculated. Electron wave functions s1/2s_{1/2} and p1/2p_{1/2} tend to infinity for point-like nucleus and this significantly increases the sensitivity to the nuclear size:

δBB(RZa)γ1/2+γ3/22\frac{\delta B}{B}\sim\left(\frac{RZ}{a}\right)^{\gamma_{1/2}+\gamma_{3/2}-2} (10)

Power of the small parameter RZ/aRZ/a becomes negative for Z>132Z>132 (this means ”infinite” δB/B\delta B/B for R=0R=0). However, the ratio δB/B\delta B/B may exceed 1% already for Z>80Z>80. Therefore, we should use a more accurate electric quadrupole operator (2) inside the nucleus. Below we complement our rough estimates by the accurate numerical calculations.

IV Hydrogen-like systems

We start our study from the hydrogen-like systems. We use the Fermi distribution of the electric charge over the nuclear volume with R=1.2A1/3R=1.2A^{1/3}, here AA is the number of nucleons in the nucleus. The same nuclear radius is used in (2). We perform calculations of the allowed diagonal and non-diagonal matrix elements of operator Q^\hat{Q} for the 3s3s, 3p1/23p_{1/2}, 3p3/23p_{3/2}, 3d3/23d_{3/2} and 3d5/23d_{5/2} states. Note that all single-electron states of the same symmetry are proportional to each other on short distances, therefore, states with any principal quantum number nn can be used in the study. We choose n=3n=3 just for the convenience. The calculations are done for a set of different values of nuclear charge ZZ and for two forms of the operator Q^\hat{Q}, (1) and (2). The results are compared in Table 1. The results are presented as a difference in per cent between the two forms of the operator. One can see that the difference is small for the diagonal matrix elements. It reaches 103\sim 10^{-3} for Z=120Z=120. Note also that the effect is practically zero for states with j>3/2j>3/2. However, the effect is much larger for the off-diagonal matrix elements involving s1/2s_{1/2} or p1/2p_{1/2} states. This is because these states penetrate inside the nuclei. The effect reaches \sim 1% for Z=83Z=83 (Bi atom) and becomes even larger for higher ZZ (see Table 1).

Table 1: The effect of changing the electric quadrupole operator (in per cent) in matrix elements for the hydrogen-like single-electron wave functions. The numbers in last five columns are 100(m0/m11)100(m_{0}/m_{1}-1), where m0m_{0} is the matrix element calculated with the textbook formula (1) and m1m_{1} is the matrix element calculated with the corrected formula (2), RR is the nuclear radius in fm.
ZZ AA RR s1/2d3/2s_{1/2}-d_{3/2} s1/2d5/2s_{1/2}-d_{5/2} p1/2p3/2p_{1/2}-p_{3/2} p3/2p3/2p_{3/2}-p_{3/2} d3/2d3/2d_{3/2}-d_{3/2}
10 21 3.31071 0.0103 0.0647 0.0001 0.0000 0.0000
20 43 4.20408 0.0340 0.1118 0.0005 0.0001 0.0000
30 67 4.87386 0.0699 0.1664 0.0022 0.0004 0.0000
40 91 5.39753 0.1220 0.2341 0.0066 0.0009 0.0000
50 119 5.90242 0.1985 0.3296 0.0167 0.0020 0.0000
60 145 6.30431 0.3067 0.4538 0.0371 0.0037 0.0001
70 171 6.66060 0.4644 0.6306 0.0772 0.0067 0.0003
80 199 7.00593 0.6936 0.8877 0.1537 0.0118 0.0007
83 239 7.44699 0.8075 1.0685 0.1953 0.0150 0.0010
92 235 7.40521 1.1079 1.3601 0.3354 0.0223 0.0018
100 245 7.50879 1.4816 1.7606 0.5419 0.0326 0.0032
120 295 7.98832 3.0962 3.6355 1.7239 0.0879 0.0128
Refer to caption
Figure 1: First order core polarisation correction. Cross stands for the electric quadrupole operator, vv is valence state, cc is a state in the core, mm is the virtual state above the core.
Table 2: The effect of changing the electric quadrupole operator (in per cent) in the diagonal matrix elements for the valence single-electron wave functions of many-electron atoms and ions. The numbers in the last five columns are 100(m0/m11)100(m_{0}/m_{1}-1), where m0=v|Q^|vm_{0}=\langle v|\hat{Q}|v\rangle is the matrix element calculated with the textbook formula (1) and m1m_{1} is the matrix element calculated with the correct formula (2). n=7n=7 for Fr, U, Fm and No, n=8n=8 for E120.
ZZ Atom v=np3/2v=np_{3/2} v=(n1)d3/2v=(n-1)d_{3/2} v=(n1)d5/2v=(n-1)d_{5/2} v=(n2)f5/2v=(n-2)f_{5/2} v=(n2)f7/2v=(n-2)f_{7/2}
87 Fr I 0.059 0.037 0.216 0.162 0.165
92 U VI 0.041 -0.020 0.070 0.073 0.088
100 Fm I 0.069 0.072
102 No II 0.108 -0.090 0.392
120 E120 II 0.433 -1.373 1.664 1.315 1.526

V Many-electron atoms

Next, we study the effect of changing the electric quadrupole operator Q^\hat{Q} from (1) to (2) on the diagonal matrix elements (i.e. on the electric quadrupole constants BB) in many-electron atoms. As examples, we consider heavy atoms or ions with a relatively simple electronic structure, one electron above closed shells. In atoms with several valence electrons the effect may be even bigger due to the large configuration mixing, which involves the s1/2d3/2,d5/2s_{1/2}-d_{3/2},d_{5/2} and p1/2p3/2p_{1/2}-p_{3/2} matrix elements of Q^\hat{Q} . The calculations are done in the VN1V^{N-1} approximation, which means that the initial relativistic Hartree-Fock (RHF) calculations are performed for the closed-shell core, the states of external electron are calculated in the field of the frozen core. To calculate matrix elements of the Q^\hat{Q} operator, we use the time-dependent Hartree-Fock method which is equivalent to the well-known random-phase approximation (RPA) - see e.g.  Johnson . The RPA equations can be written as (see e.g  TDHF )

(H^0ϵc)δψc=(Q^+δV)ψc.(\hat{H}_{0}-\epsilon_{c})\delta\psi_{c}=-(\hat{Q}+\delta V)\psi_{c}. (11)

Here H^0\hat{H}_{0} is the RHF operator, index cc numerates states in the core, ψc\psi_{c} is a single-electron wave function for a particular state in the core, δψc\delta\psi_{c} is the correction to ψc\psi_{c} caused by external field Q^\hat{Q}, δV\delta V is the correction to the self-consisted RHF potential caused by the change in all core wave functions. The RPA equations (11) are solved self-consistently for all states in the core to find δV\delta V. Matrix elements for valence states vv are then calculated as
v|Q^+δV|v\langle v|\hat{Q}+\delta V|v\rangle.

The results of calculations are presented in Table 2. We included Fr and U as heavy atoms of a broad experimental interest. We also included Fm and No as heaviest atoms for which atomic spectra measurements are in progress Fm1 ; Fm2 ; No1 ; No2 ; No3 ; No4 . We included E120 for illustration on how big the effect could be for very high ZZ. We see from the table that the effect on BB in many-electron atoms is significantly larger than that for the hydrogen-like systems (see Table 1). This is due to the contribution of the s1/2d3/2,d5/2s_{1/2}-d_{3/2},d_{5/2} and p1/2p3/2p_{1/2}-p_{3/2} off-diagonal matrix elements into the core polarisation correction (see Fig. 1).

Table 3: Relative values of the core polarisation correction to the matrix elements of the valence states of E120 II as well as their decomposition over different core channels (all numbers in per cent). Core polarisation correction v|δV|v\langle v|\delta V|v\rangle is related to the total matrix element v|Q^+δV|v\langle v|\hat{Q}+\delta V|v\rangle. One channel is the sum over all core states of given type (s1/2s_{1/2}, p1/2p_{1/2}, etc.) and all possible excited states in the expression for core polarisation (see diagrams on Fig. 1).
v=8p3/2v=8p_{3/2} v=7d3/2v=7d_{3/2} v=7d5/2v=7d_{5/2} v=6f5/2v=6f_{5/2} v=6f7/2v=6f_{7/2}
Relative CP correction (per cent)
36 20 60 91 93
Channel Decomposition over channels (per cent)
s1/2s_{1/2} 20 304 82 59 52
p1/2p_{1/2} -158 -1505 -579 -349 -361
p3/2p_{3/2} 255 1487 652 439 450
d3/2d_{3/2} -32 -373 -117 -79 -73
d5/2d_{5/2} 15 186 63 29 31
f5/2f_{5/2} -3 -31 -10 -5 -5
f7/2f_{7/2} 3 32 9 6 6
Total 100 100 100 100 100

For better understanding of the role of the off-diagonal matrix elements in the core polarisation correction we present in Table 3 the decomposition of the corrections to matrix element of different states of E120+ over different channels in the core. One channel is the sum over all core states cc of particular symmetry and all possible states mm above the core. For example, ss-channel contains terms with the 1s|Q^+δV|nd3/2\langle 1s|\hat{Q}+\delta V|nd_{3/2}\rangle, 1s|Q^+δV|nd5/2\langle 1s|\hat{Q}+\delta V|nd_{5/2}\rangle, 2s|Q^+δV|nd3/2\langle 2s|\hat{Q}+\delta V|nd_{3/2}\rangle, etc. The s1/2s_{1/2} and p1/2p_{1/2} channels give non-zero contribution due to off-diagonal matrix elements only. The off-diagonal matrix elements contribute to other channels too. For example, the 2p3/2|Q^+δV|np1/2\langle 2p_{3/2}|\hat{Q}+\delta V|np_{1/2}\rangle matrix elements contribute to the p3/2p_{3/2} channel.

As can be seen from Table 3, the contribution of the off-diagonal matrix elements is huge (mostly, in channels s1/2s_{1/2} and p1/2p_{1/2}) Some contributions of the off-diagonal matrix elements exceed many times the final answer since there are partial cancellations of these big contributions. Large off-diagonal matrix elements are more sensitive to the form of the operator Q^\hat{Q}, see Table 1. These two facts lead to significant enhancement of the effect in many-electron atoms.

Calculations of the probabilities of clock transitions induced by the hyperfine interaction (see, for example Ref. hfs-tr ) can also benefit from considering correct form of the electric quadrupole operator Q^\hat{Q}. These transitions, forbidden as electric dipole transitions, are open by off-diagonal mixing of states with different electron angular momentum by the magnetic dipole or electric quadrupole interaction hfs-tr .

Acknowledgements — The work was supported by the Australian Research Council Grants No. DP230101058 and DP200100150.

References

  • (1) I. I. Sobelman, Introduction to the Theory of Atomic Spectra - 1st edition, (Pergamon, 1972).
  • (2) W. R. Johnson, Atomic Structure Theory: Lectures on Atomic Physics, (Springer Verlag, Berlin (ISBN 978-3-540-68010-9)).
  • (3) Yu. Ts. Oganessian and V. K. Utyonkov, Super-heavy element research, 2015 Rep. Prog. Phys. 78, 036301 (2015).
  • (4) H.H. Stroke, H.T. Duong, and J. Pinard, Bohr-Weisskopf effect: influence of the distributed nuclear magnetization on hfs, Hyperfine Interactions 129, 319 (2000).
  • (5) F. F. Karpeshin, M. B. Trzhaskovskaya, The theory of the Bohr-Weisskopf effect in the hyperfine structure, Nuclear Physics A 941, 66 (2015).
  • (6) J. Zhang, M. Tandecki, R. Collister, S. Aubin, J.A. Behr, E. Gomez, G. Gwinner, L. A. Orozco, M. R. Pearson, and G. D. Sprouse (FrPNC collaboration), Hyperfine Anomalies in Fr: Boundaries of the Spherical Single Particle Model, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 042501 (2015).
  • (7) L. V. Skripnikov, Nuclear magnetization distribution effect in molecules: Ra+ and RaF hyperfine structure, J. Chem. Phys. 153, 114114 (2020).
  • (8) S.G. Porsev, M.S. Safronova, and M.G. Kozlov, Precision Calculation of Hyperfine Constants for Extracting Nuclear Moments of 229Th, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 253001 (2021).
  • (9) F. F. Karpeshin and M. B. Trzhaskovskaya, Comparison of Methods for Eliminating the Bohr-Weisskopf Effect in Atomic Spectra of 209Bi Heavy Ions, Physics of Atomic Nuclei 84, 418 (2021).
  • (10) Yu. A. Demidov, E. A. Konovalova, R. T. Imanbaeva, M. G. Kozlov, and A. E. Barzakh, Atomic calculations of the hyperfine-structure anomaly in gold, Phys. Rev. A 103, 032824 (2021).
  • (11) S. D. Prosnyak and L. V. Skripnikov, Effect of nuclear magnetization distribution within the Woods-Saxon model: Hyperfine splitting in neutral Tl, Phys. Rev. C 103, 034314 (2021).
  • (12) B. M. Roberts, P. G. Ranclaud, and J. S. M. Ginges. Bohr-Weisskopf effect: From hydrogenlike-ion experiments to heavy-atom calculations of the hyperfine structure. Phys. Rev. A 105, 052802 ( 2022).
  • (13) I.B. Khriplovich, Parity Nonconservation in Atomic Phenomena, (Gordon and Breach Science Publishers New York, 1991)
  • (14) V.V. Flambaum and J.S.M. Ginges, Nuclear Schiff moment and time invariance violation in atoms. Phys. Rev. A 65, 032113 (2002).
  • (15) V. A. Dzuba and V. V. Flambaum, Hyperfine-induced electric dipole contributions to the electric octupole and magnetic quadrupole atomic clock transitions, Phys. Rev. A 93, 052517 (2016).
  • (16) V. A. Dzuba, V. V. Flambaum, P. G. Silvestrov, O. P. Sushkov, Correlation potential method for the calculation of energy levels, hyperfine structure and E1 transition amplitudes in atoms with one unpaired electron, J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Phys., 20, 1399-1412 (1987).
  • (17) H. Backe, A. Dretzke, S. Fritzsche, R. G. Haire, P. Kunz, W. Lauth, M. Sewtz, N, Trautmann, Hyperfine Interactions 162, 3 (2005).
  • (18) M. Sewtz, H. Backe, A. Dretzke, G. Kube, W. Lauth, P. Schwamb, K. Eberhardt, C. Grüning, P. Thörle, N. Trautmann, P. Kunz, J. Lassen, G. Passler, C. Z. Dong, S. Fritzsche, R. G. Haire, Phys. Rev. Lett. 90,163002 (2003).
  • (19) P. Chhetri, D. Ackermann, H. Backe, M. Block, B. Cheal, C. Droese, Ch. E. Düllmann, J. Even, et. al. Precision Measurement of the First Ionization Potential of Nobelium, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 263003 (2018)
  • (20) T. K. Sato, M. Asai, A. Borschevsky, R. Beerwerth, Y. Kaneya, H. Makii, A. Mitsukai, Y. Nagame, et al, First Ionization Potentials of Fm, Md, No, and Lr: Verification of Filling-Up of 5f Electrons and Confirmation of the Actinide Series, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 140, 14609 (2018).
  • (21) J. Warbinek, B. Andelic, M. Block, et al, Advancing Radiation-Detected Resonance Ionization towards Heavier Elements and More Exotic Nuclides. Atoms, 10, 41 (2022), https://doi.org/10.3390/atoms10020041
  • (22) D. Münzberg, M. Block, A. Claessens, R. Ferrer, M. Laatiaoui, J. Lantis, S. Nothhelfer, S. Raeder, P. Van Duppen, Resolution Characterizations of JetRIS in Mainz Using 164Dy. Atoms, 10, 57 (2022), https://doi.org/10.3390/atoms10020057