Recent Doublet Results and Measurement Technique Development at the University of Minnesota

  • David G. Kayser
  • Justin Halverson
  • Walter H. JohnsonJr.


This paper will describe some recent doublet results and describe further peak matching technique development which has occurred as part of the continuing program of atomic mass measurements at the University of Minnesota. At AMCO 4, David Kayser presented a brief review of a technique we have named generalized peak matching (1). This technique is particularly useful in circumstances in which the two members of the doublet to be measured are not completely resolved. Dr. Kayser has developed the general theory of this process which deals with the determination of the mass differences for a multi-component spectrum. In order to be brief in this part of the presentation, the technique will be illustrated only with a mass doublet. Suppose that we assume a two component spectrum with individual peak shapes f(t). The two component spectrum may be written g(t) = f(t) + A f(t−b) in which b is the spacing and A is the amplitude ratio between the peaks. We may use Laplace transform theory to transform this equation to g(s) =(1+Ae-bs)f(s). This process isolates the quantities A and b from the function f(s).


Wave Form Mass Difference Fundamental Constant Component Spectrum Computer Match 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    D. C. Kayser, R. A. Britten, and W. H. Johnson, Atomic Masses and Fundamental Constants 4, edited by J. H. Sanders and A. H. Wapstra ( Plenum Publishing Corporation, New York, 1972 ), p. 172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    J. L. Benson and W. H. Johnson, Jr., Phys. Rev. 141, 1112 (1966).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    R. C. Barber and R. L. Bishop, Can. J. Phys. 50, 34 (1972).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    J. O. Meredith and R. C. Barber, Can. J. Phys. 50, 1195 (1972).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    A. H. Wapstra and N. B. Gove, Nuclear Data Tables 9, Nos. 4 and 5, (1971).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1976

Authors and Affiliations

  • David G. Kayser
    • 1
  • Justin Halverson
    • 1
  • Walter H. JohnsonJr.
  1. 1.School of Physics and AstronomyUniversity of MinnesotaMinneapolisUSA

Personalised recommendations