Advertisement

Hyperfine Interactions

, Volume 3, Issue 1, pp 157–169 | Cite as

Nuclear orientation of105Rh and95Tc in iron

  • G. Wittkemper
  • H. D. Rüter
  • W. Haaks
  • E. Gerdau
Article

Abstract

The temperature-dependent anisotropy of γ-rays following the decay of oriented95Tc and105Rh nuclei was studied with a Ge(Li) detector. Mixing coefficients of some γ-and preceding β-transitions, the spins of two intermediate levels, and the magnetic hyperfine splitting of the95Tc and105Rh ground states in an Fe host were measured. From the known hyperfine fields the following magnetic moments were deduced:

$$\begin{gathered} \mu \left( {^{105} Rh,\tfrac{{7 + }}{2}} \right) = 4.34\left( {12} \right) n.m.; \hfill \\ \mu \left( {^{95} Tc,\tfrac{{9 + }}{2}} \right) = 5.82\left( {12} \right)n.m. \hfill \\ \end{gathered}$$

Keywords

Iron Thin Film Anisotropy Intermediate Level Hyperfine Field 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    Y. Kobayashi, J. Inorg. Nucl. Chem. 29 (1967) 134.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    R.J. Blin-Stoyle and M.A. Grace,Handbuch der Physik 42 (1957) 555.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    S.R. de Groot, H.A. Tolhoek and W.J. Huiskamp in Alpha-, beta- and gamma-Ray Spectros-copy, ed. K. Siegbahn, vol. 2 (North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1965) p. 1199.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    Nuclear Data Sheets, vol. 11 (1974) no. 4.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    W. Haaks, Diplomarbeit Univ. Hamburg 1975 (unpublished).Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    J. Wese, E. Hagn, P. Kienle and G. Eska, see ref. [18] p. 112.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    M. Behar and Z.W. Grabowski, Nucl. Phys. A196 (1972) 412.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    W.R. Pierson, Phys. Rev. 140 (1965) B1516.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    H.H. Bolotin and D.A. McClure, Phys. Rev. C3 (1971) 797.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    E. Hagn, thesis TU München 1974.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    L. Mesko, A. Nilsson, S.A. Hjorth, M. Brenner and O. Holmlund,Nucl. Phys. A 181 (1972) 566.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    J.A. Cameron, I.A. Campbell, J.P. Compton, R.A.G. Lines and G. V. H. Wilson, Proc. Phys. Soc. 90 (1967) 1089.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    K. Krämer and B.W. Huber, Z. Phys. 268 (1974) 336.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    H. Noya, A. Arima and H. Horie, Progr. Theor. Phys. Suppl. 8 (1959) 33.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    E. Matthias, D.A. Shirley, N. Edelstein, H.J. Körner and B.A. Olsen, in Hyperfine structure and nuclear radiations (North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1968) p. 878.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    B. Wannberg, J. O. Jönsson and L. Sanner, Phys. Scripta 1 (1970) 238.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    G.N. Stinson, A.R. Pierce, J. C. Waddington and R.G. Summers-Gill, Can. J. Phys. 49 (1971) 906.Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    U. Scholtze, E. Klein and W.D. Brewer, Int. Conf. on hyperfine interactions studied in nuclear reactions and decay, Uppsala, 1974, Contributed Papers, ed. E. Karlsson and R. Wäppling (Almquist et Wiksell, Uppsala, 1975), p.110.Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    American Institut of Physics Handbook 5–244 (1957).Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    H. D. Rüter, thesis Univ. Hamburg 1975 (unpublished).Google Scholar
  21. [21]
    S.G. Nilsson, Mat. Fys. Medd. Dan. Vid. Selsk. 29 (1955) no. 16.Google Scholar
  22. [22]
    G. Wittkemper, thesis Univ. Hamburg 1973 (unpublished).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© North-Holland Publishing Company 1977

Authors and Affiliations

  • G. Wittkemper
    • 1
  • H. D. Rüter
    • 1
  • W. Haaks
    • 1
  • E. Gerdau
    • 1
  1. 1.II. Institut für ExperimentalphysikUniversität HamburgHamburgGermany

Personalised recommendations