Bimodality and charge splitting in fission of actinides

  • A. V. Andreev
  • G. G. Adamian
  • N. V. Antonenko
  • S. P. Ivanova
Original Article

Abstract.

Within the scission point model the bimodality in fission of actinides is demonstrated to be related to different neighboring charge and mass splittings. This phenomenon is peculiar not only for the fission of heavy nuclei like 256,258Fm and 256,258,262No but also for fission of lighter actinides like 236U, 240Pu and 252Cf. The experiments are suggested to prove our interpretation of bimodality.

PACS.

24.75.+i General properties of fission 21.60.Gx Cluster models 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    E.K. Hulet , Phys. Rev. C 40, 770 (1989)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    H.C. Britt, D.C. Hoffman, J. van der Plicht, J.B. Wilhelmy, E. Cheifetz, R.J. Dupzyk, R.W. Lougheed, Phys. Rev. C 30, 559 (1984).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    E.K. Hulet, in Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Dynamical Aspects of Nuclear Fission, Casta-Papiernucka, Slovak Republic, 1996, edited by J. Kliman, B.I. Pustylnik (JINR Publishing Department, Dubna, 1996).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    P. Möller, J.R. Nix, W.J. Swiatecki, Nucl. Phys. A 469, 1 (1987)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    V.V. Pashkevich, Nucl. Phys. A 477, 1 (1988).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    S. Cwiok, P. Rozmej, A. Sobiczewski, Z. Patyk, Nucl. Phys. A 491, 281 (1989).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    M. Warda, J.L. Edigo, L.M. Robledo, K. Pomorski, Phys. Rev. C 66, 014310 (2002).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    M. Warda, K. Pomorski, J.L. Edigo, L.M. Robledo, Int. J. Mod. Phys. E 13, 169 (2004).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    H. Goutte, J.F. Berger, P. Casoli, D. Gogny, Phys. Rev. C 71, 024316 (2005).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    B.D. Wilkins, E.P. Steinberg, R.R. Chasman, Phys. Rev. C 14, 1832 (1976).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    A.V. Andreev, G.G. Adamian, N.V. Antonenko, S.P. Ivanova, W. Scheid, Eur. Phys. J. A 22, 51 (2004).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Yu.V. Pyatkov, V.G. Tishchenko, V.V. Pashkevich, V.A. Maslov, D.V. Kamanin, I.V. Kljuev, W.H. Trzaska, Nucl. Instrum. Methods A 488, 381 (2002).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    U. Quade , Nucl. Phys. A 487, 1 (1988).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    R.W. Hasse, W.D. Myers, Geometrical Relationships of Macroscopic Nuclear Physics (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1988).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    G.G. Adamian , Int. J. Mod. Phys. E 5, 191 (1996).Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    W.P. Myers, W. Swiatecki, Ark. Fys. 36, 343 (1967).Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    J. Maruhn, W. Greiner, Z. Phys. 251, 431 (1972)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    T.M. Shneidman, G.G. Adamian, N.V. Antonenko, S.P. Ivanova, R.V. Jolos, W. Scheid, Phys. Rev. C 65, 064302 (2002).Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    A. Krasznahorkay , Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 2073 (1998)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    J.F. Berger, M. Girod, D. Gogny, Nucl. Phys. A 502, 85c (1989)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    V.M. Strutinsky, Proceedings of the 2nd International Symposium on Physics and Chemistry of Fission (IAEA, Vienna, 1969) p. 155.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    W. Lang, H.G. Clerc, H. Wohlfarth, H. Schrader, K.H. Schmidt, Nucl. Phys. A 345, 34 (1980).Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    C. Schmitt , Nucl. Phys. A 430, 21 (1984).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Società Italiana di Fisica and Springer-Verlag 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. V. Andreev
    • 1
    • 2
  • G. G. Adamian
    • 1
    • 3
  • N. V. Antonenko
    • 1
    • 2
  • S. P. Ivanova
    • 1
  1. 1.Joint Institute for Nuclear ResearchDubnaRussia
  2. 2.Institut für Theoretische Physik der Justus-Liebig-UniversitätGiessenGermany
  3. 3.Institute of Nuclear PhysicsTashkentUzbekistan

Personalised recommendations