## Abstract

My mentor, Robert S. Mulliken, once said to me, “Molecules are just like a puzzle. They may seem hard to understand, but if you just think about them, you can always solve the problem.” Can we be as confident about atomic collisions? Considering the progress we have made in the past dozen years, the answer seems to be yes.

## Keywords

Molecular Orbital Exit Channel Atomic Collision Positron Formation Separate Atom
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.

## References

- 1.W. Brandt and R. Laubert, Phys. Rev. Letters 24, 1037 (1970).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 2.It is questionable whether the concept of diabatic states can be applied to level crossings in which there is a change in angular momentum (o-7, 7–6, etc.) The author is not aware of any such set of diabatic states.Google Scholar
- 3.J.E. Bayfield, accompanying article, p. 397.Google Scholar
- 4.D.R. Bates and R.H.G. Reid, in Advances in Atomic and Molecular Physics 4, 13 (1968); D.R. Bates, K. Ledsham and A.L. Stewart, Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. (Lond) 246, 215 (1953).MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
- 5.G.J. Lockwood and E. Everhart, Phys. Rev. 125, 567 (1962).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 6.F.P. Ziemba and E. Everhart, Phys. Rev. Letters 2, 299 (1959).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 7.D.R. Bates and D.A. Williams, Proc. Phys. Soc. (London) 83, 425 (1964).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 8.F. Hund, Z. Physik 40, 742 (1927); R.S. Mulliken, Phys. Rev. 32, 186 (1928).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 9.H. Rosenthal, Phys. Rev. Letters 27, 635 (1971).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 10.R.F. Stebbings, R.A. Young, C.L. Oxley, and H. Ehrhardt, Phys. Rev. 138, A1312 (1965).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 11.J.E. Bayfield, Phys. Rev. 185, 105 (1969).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 12.M.C. Chidichimo-Frank and R.D. Piacentini, J. Phys. B: Atom. Molec. Phys. 7, 548 (1974).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 13.J.C. Houver, J. Fayeton, M. Abignoli, and M. Barat, Phys. Rev. Letters 28, 1433 (1972); also J.C. Houver, J. Fayeton and M. Barat, Proc. VIII International Conference on the Phys. of Electronic and Atomic Collisions, Belgrade (1973), p. 759; also M. Barat (private communication).Google Scholar
- 14.V. SethuRaman, W.R. Thorson and C.F. Lebeda, Phys. Rev. A 8, 1316 (1973). References to several earlier papers by Thorson et al. are given here.Google Scholar
- 15.M.E. Rudd, C.A. Sautter and C.L. Bailey, Phys. Rev. 151, 20 (1966); G.B. Crooks and M.E. Rudd, Phys. Rev. A 3, 1628 (1971).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 16.N. Stolterfoht, Z. Phys. 248, 81 (1971).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 17.W.J.B. Oldham, Jr., Phys. Rev. 140, A1477 (1965); 161, 1 (1967). See also A. Salin,,J. Phys. B, Atom. Molec. Phys. 2, 631 (1969); J. Macek, Phys. Rev. A 1, 235 (1970) and T.F.M. Bonsen and D. Banks, J. Phys. B, Atom. Molec. Phys. 4, 706 (1971).Google Scholar
- 18.Y.B. Band (preprint).Google Scholar
- 19.W. Lichten, Phys. Rev. 131, 229–238 (1963).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 20.R.P. Marchi and Felix Smith, Phys. Rev. 139, A1025 (1965).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 21.F.T. Smith, D.C. Lorents, W. Aberth and R.P. Marchi, Phys. Rev. Letters 15, 742 (1965).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 22.H. Rosenthal and H. Foley, Phys. Rev. Letters 23, 1480 (1969). H. Rosenthal, Phys. Rev. A 4, 1030 (1971).Google Scholar
- 23.J.N. Bardsley, Phys. Rev. A 3, 1317 (1971).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 24.W.C. Keever and E. Everhart, Phys. Rev. 150, 43 (1966).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 25.M. Lipeles, R. Novick, and N. Tolk, Phys. Rev. Letters 15, 815 (1965); S. Dworetsky, R. Novick, W.W. Smith, and N. Tolk, Phys. Rev. Letters 18, 939 (1967). See also references 22 and 38 for listing of references.Google Scholar
- 26.M. Barat, D. Dhuicq. R. Francois, R. McCarroll, R.D. Piacentini, A. Salin, J. Phys. B 5, 1343 (1972).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 27.R. McCarroll and R.D. Piacentini, J. Phys. B 4, 1026 (1971).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 28.F.T. Smith, Phys. Rev. 179, 111 (1969).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 29.B.A. Lippman and T.F. O’Malley, Phys. Rev. A 2, 2115 (1970); T.F. O’Malley, Phys. Rev. 150, 14 (1966); 162 98 (1967); T.F. O’Malley and H.S. Taylor, ibid, 176 207 (1968); V. Sidis and H. LeFebvre-Brion, J. Phys. B, Atom. Molec. Phys. 4, 1040 (1971); B. Andresen and S.E. Nielsen, Mol. Phys. 21, 523 (1971).Google Scholar
- 30.H. Gabriel and K. Taulbjerg, Phys. Rev. (July, 1974 issue, in press).Google Scholar
- 31.Yu. N. Demkov, J. Exptl. Theoret. Phys. (U.S.S.R.) 45, 195 (1963) (English Translation: Soviet Physics, JETP 18, 138 (1964)).Google Scholar
- 32.R.E. Olson, Phys. Rev. A 6, 1822 (1972).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 33.W. Lichten, Phys. Rev. 139, A27 (1965).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 34.H.F. Helbig and E. Everhart, Phys. Rev. 136, A674 (1964).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 35.U. Fano and W. Lichten, Phys. Rev. Letters 14, 627 (1965).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 36.W. Lichten, Advances in Chemical Physics 13, 41 (1967).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 37.W. Lichten, Phys. Rev. 164, 131 (1967).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 38.M. Barat and W. Lichten, Phys. Rev. A 6, 211 (1972).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 39.W
_{;}Brandt and S. Lundgvist, Physics Letters 4, 47 (1963), Arkiv For Fysik 28, 399 (1964); J. Quant. Spectroscopy Radiative Transfer 4, 679 (1964); A. Russek and M. Tom Thomas, Phys. Rev. 109,^{-}2015 (1958); 114, 1538 (1959); A. Russek and J.B. Bulman, Phys. Rev. 122, 506 (1961); A. Russek 132, 246 (1963); M. Ya. Amusia, Phys. Lett. 14, 36 (1965), Zh. Tekh. Fiz. 36, 1409 (1966) [English Transi: Soviet Physics,-Tech. Phys. 11, 1053 (1967)].Google Scholar - 40.A.V. Afrosimov, Yu. S. Gordeev, M.N. Panov, and N.V. Federenko, Zh. Tekh. Fiz. 34, 1613 [1964-English: Soviet Phys-Technical Physics 9, 1248 (1965)].Google Scholar
- 41.J.D. Garcia, R.J. Fortner, and T.M. Kavanagh, Revs. Mod. Physics 45, 111 (1973).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 42.F.W. Saris, “Characteristic X-Ray Production in Heavy-IonAtom Collisions.” in VII ICPEAC, Invited Talks and Progress Reports T.R. Govers and F.J. deHeer, eds., ( North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1971 ).Google Scholar
- 43.M.E. Rudd, “Introduction to Inner-Shell Excitation and
*De-*excitation Processes, ref. 42, see also, ”Mechanisms of Inner Shell Excitation and De-excitation in Multiply Ionized Beams.“ p. 1485, Proceedings of the International Conference on Inner Shell Ionization Phenomena and Future Applications, CONF720404, U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, Technical Information Center, Oak Ridge, Tenn. (1973).Google Scholar - 44.G.N. Ogurtsov, Reviews of Modern Physics 44, 1 (1972).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 45.Quentin C. Kessel, “Coincidence Measurements,” in Case Studies in Atomic Physics, Vol. I, 401 (1969), edited by M.R.C. McDowell and E.W. McDaniel; Q.C. Kessel and B. Fastrup, “The Production of Inner-Shell Vacancies in Heavy Ion-Atom Collisions.” Ibid, 3, 139 (1973).Google Scholar
- 46.For several other review articles and discussions of current research see the Proceedings listed in footnote 43, Part B-Heavy Ion-Atom and Atom-Atom Collisions articles by F.T. Smith, D.G. Lorents and R.E. Olson, p. 1175; B. Fastrup, p. 1188; J.S. Briggs, p. 1209; J.A. Cairns, p. 1223; F.W. Saris, I.V. Mitchell, D.C. Santry, J.A. Davies and R. Laubert, p. 1255; P.H. Mokier, H.J. Stein, and P. Armbruster, p. 1283; V.S. Afrosimov, p. 1297; F.W. Bingham, p. 1320; T.M. Kavanagh, R.J. Fortner and R.C. Der, p. 1332; F.C. Jundt, H. Kubo and K.H. Purser, p. 1450. All these articles discuss application of the electron promotion model to collision experiments.Google Scholar
- a. See “Theory of Charged-Particle Excitation,” D.H. Madison and E. Merzbacher in Atomic Inner-Shell Process,B. Crasemann, ed. (Academic Press, to be published).Google Scholar
- 47.Q.C. Kessel and E. Everhart, Phys. Rev. 146, 16 (1966).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 48.M.P. McCaughey, E.J. Knystautas, H.C. Hayden, and E. Everhart, Phys. Rev. Letters 21, 65 (1968).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 49.B. Fastrup. G. Hermann, and Q.C. Kessel, Phys. Rev. Letters 27, 771 (1971).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 50.B. Fastrup, E. B$ving, G.A. Larsen and P. Dahl, J. Phys. B: Atom. Molec. Phys. 7, L206 (1974).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 51.T.M. Kavanagh, M.E. Cunningham, R.C. Der, R.J. Fortner, J.M. Khan, J. Zaharis, and J.D. Garcia, Phys. Rev. Letters 25, 1473 (1970).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 52.K. Taulbjerg and P. Sigmund, Phys. Rev. A 5, 1285 (1972); see also K. Taulbjerg, B. Fastrup and E. Laegsgaard, Phys. Rev. A 8, 1814 (1973); also J. Macek, J.A. Cairns and J.S. Briggs, Phys. Rev. Letters 28, 1298 (1972); G. Bissinger and L.C. Feldman,Phys. Rev. A 8, 1624 (1973).Google Scholar
- 53.F.P. Larkins, J. Phys. B 5, 571 (1972). FICAP abstracts,p.613.Google Scholar
- 54.W. Brandt and R. Laubert, Phys. Lett. A 43, 53 (1973).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 55.H. Tawara and J. Kistemaker, Phys. Lett. A 41, 287 (1972).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 56.W.E. Meyerhof, Phys. Rev. Letters 31, 1341 (1973). For experiments on the K-vacancy sharing mechanism, see H. Kubo, F.C. Jundt and K.H. Purser, Phys. Rev. Letters 31, 674 (1973); H. Ziem, N. Stolterfocht, and D. Ridder, Paper to be presented at Helsinki Conference on X-ray Processes in Matter (July 1974 ).Google Scholar
- 57.B. Fastrup (private communication).Google Scholar
- 58.E.W. Thulstrup and H. Johansen, Phys. Rev. A 6, 206 (1972).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 59.R.S. Mulliken, Chem. Phys. Letters 14, 137 (1972).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 60.J.S. Briggs and M.R. Hayns, J. Phys. B 6, 514 (1973).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 61.V. Sidis and M. Barat, VIII ICPEAC, p. 200 (1973), J. Phys. B (in press)Google Scholar
- 62a.J. Eichler and U. Wille, Phys. Rev. Letters 33, 56 (1974); b. J. Eichler and U. Wille, FICAP - Abstracts, p. 613.Google Scholar
- 63.Larkins, Ref. 53, has claimed that his diabatic correlations do not agree with that of the electron promotion model. However, inspection of his calculations shows that his steps in internuclear distance are too coarse to support his conclusions. His conclusions, in part, have been based on an apparent Landau-Zener crossing of the 2a and 3o curves (see Fig. 12 at 2R = 0.6 a.u.). B. Muller
^{g}(Dissertation, Frankfurt University, 1973) has shown that this type of pseudo-crossing does not obey the Landau-Zener theory, but follows the Demkov theory instead. That is, the eigenfunctions have a phase shift of 7r/4 rather than 7/2 in going through the pseudo-crossing. Thus there is no diabatic correlation possible at this pseudocrossing at very high velocities, where the promotion model breaks down.Google Scholar - 64.J.S. Briggs and J.H. Macek, J. Phys. B 5, 579 (1972); 6, 982 (1973).Google Scholar
- 65.R.K. Cacek, Q.C. Kessel and M.E. Rudd, Phys. Rev. A 2, 1327 (1970).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 66.S.K. Knudson and W.R. Thorson, Canad. J. of Physics 48, 313 (1970).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 67.S. Sackmann, H.O. Lutz, and J. Briggs, Phys. Rev. Letters 32, 805 (1974).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 68.F.W. Saris, W.F. van der Weg, H. Tawara, and R. Laubert, Phys. Rev. Letters 28, 717 (1972).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 69.F.W. Saris, in Seventh ICPEAC, Invited Talks and Progress Reports edited by T.R. Govers and F.J. deHeer ( North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1971.Google Scholar
- 70.F.W. Saris, I.V. Mitchell, D.C. Santry, J.A. Davies, and R. Laubert, in Proceedings of the International Conference on Inner Shell Ionization Phenomena edited by R.W. Fink, S.T. Manson, J.M. Palms, and P.V. Rao, CONF-720404 (U.S. Atomic Energy Commision, Oak Ridge, Tenn., 1973 ), p. 1255.Google Scholar
- 71.P.H. Mokier, H.J. Stein, and P. Armbruster, Phys. Rev. 29, 827 (1972).ADSGoogle Scholar
- 72.P.H. Mokler, H.J. p. in Ref. 70, 1283.Google Scholar
- 73.J.R. MacDonald, M.D. Brown, and T. Chiao, Phys, Rev. Letters 30, 471 (1973).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 74.W.E. Meyerhof, T.K. Saylor, S.M. Lazerus, W.A. Little, B.B. Triplett, and L.F. Chase, Jr., Phys. Rev. Letters 30, 1279 (1973); erratum, 30, 1279 (1973).ADSGoogle Scholar
- 75.W.E. Meyerhof, T.K. Saylor, S.M. Lazerus, W.A. Little, B.B. Triplett, L.F. Chase, Jr., and R. Anholt, Phys. Rev. Letters 32, 1279 (1974).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 76.G. Bissinger and L.C. Feldman, Phys. Rev. Letters 33, 1 (1974); Phys. Rev. A 8, 1624 (1973).Google Scholar
- 77.C.K. Davis and J.S. Greenberg, Phys. Rev. Letters 32, 1215 (1974).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 78.J.A. Cairns, A.D. Marwick, J. Macek and J.S. Briggs, Phys. Rev. Letters 32, 509 (1974).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 79.F.C. Jundt, H. Kubo, H.E. Gove, University of Rochester Nuclear Structure Laboratory report UR-NSRL-81 (1974).Google Scholar
- 80.W. Lichten, Phys. Rev. A 9, 1458 (1974).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 81.G. Gerber and A. Niehaus, Phys. Rev. Letters 31, 1231 (1973).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 82.J.S. Greenberg (private communication); J.S. Greenberg, C.K. Davis, B. Müller and W. Greiner (to be published in the Proceedings of the Int. Conf. on Reactions between Complex Nuclei, Nashville, 1974 ); J.S. Greenberg, C.K. Davis, P. Vincent, FICAP Abstracts, p. 617.Google Scholar
- 83.J.S. Briggs and J.H. Macek, (private communication). Similar conclusions have been reached by K. Smith, B. Müller, and W. Greiner (unpublished).Google Scholar
- 84.An X-ray-atom-coincidence experiment would be decisive (Q.C. Kessel - private communication).Google Scholar
- 85.F.W. Saris, C. Foster, A. Langenberg, and J.V. Eck (preprint).Google Scholar
- 86.W.E. Meyerhof, Bull. Am. Phys. Soc. 19, 663 (1974); Physical Review (in press - September, 1974 issue).Google Scholar
- 87.D. Burch, W.B. Ingalls, H. Wieman, and R. Vandenbosch (preprint).Google Scholar
- 88.See accompanying article by W. Greiner for a summary and references.Google Scholar
- 89.K. Smith, H. Peitz, B. Müller and W. Greiner, Phys. Rev. Letters 32, 554 (1974).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 90.S. Datz, C.D. Moak, B.R. Appleton, and T.A. Carlson, Phys. Rev. Letters 27, 363 (1971).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 91.W. Pieper and W. Greiner, Z. Physik 218, 327 (1969); L.P. Fulcher and W. Greiner, Lettere al Nuovo Cimento 2, 279 (1971); V.S. Popov, Sov. Jour. of Nucl. Phys. 12, 235 (1971) [Yad. Fiz. 12, 429 (1970)].Google Scholar
- 92.B. Müller, J. Rafelski and W. Greiner, Physics Letters 47B, 5 ( 1973 ); B. Müller, Dissertation, U. of Frankfurt (1973).Google Scholar
- 93.For a historical review, see S.J. Brodsky, SLAC-PUB-1337 (Nov. 1973-Stanford Linear Accelerator Center).Google Scholar
- 94.L. Schiff, H. Snyder, and J. Weinberg, Phys. Rev. 57, 315 (1940).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 95.I. Ya. Pomeranchuk, Ya. A. Smorodinsky, Jour. Phys. USSR 9, 97 (1945).Google Scholar
- 96.E. Fermi, Nuclear Physics University of Chicago Press, (1950).Google Scholar
- 97.S.S. Gershtein and Ya. B. Zeldovich, Sov. Phys. JETP 30, 358 (1970) [Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 57, 654 (1969)].Google Scholar
- 98.Y.B. Zeldovich and V.S. Popov, Sov. Phys. Usp. 14, 673 (1972).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 99.Recently, Mssrs. Aagaard, Uving and Fastrup (private communication) have measured the Ne-Ne K-shell excitation cross-section as a function of energy. They confirm the earlier Ne/Ne
^{+}ratio of 0.6 at a velocity of 0.78 a.u. (300 KeV). But at lower impact energies, the ratio falls off. At 0.35 a.u. it is down to 0.1. These results are in excellent agreement with the (Ne^{f}- N2)/(N^{+}- Ne) curve on fig. 10, and show that the apparent discrepancy with the promotion model was due to Demkovtype excitation of the exit channels.Google Scholar - 100.Further confirmation has been made by ab initio calculations of one-electron wavefunctions for the asymmetric case by Mssrs. Taulbjerg, Vaaben and Fastrup (private communication). They have solved the coupled differential equations for the 1s - 2p excitation and agree with the Demkov-Olson-Meyerhof formula to within about 20%. In addition, N. Stolterfoth, P. Ziem and D. Ridder (private communication) further confirm the DOM formula in several com-binations of asymmetric ion-atom collisions with gas targets.Google Scholar
- 101.For detailed discussions of MO x-rays, see the papers in this volume by F.J. de Heer (p.2 87) and P. Mokier (p.301).Google Scholar
- 102.Prof. W. Greiner has kindly informed me that a numerical error in the calculated cross sections of ref. 89 has been made. The corrected cross sections should be 500 barns at 1600 MeV.Google Scholar
- 103.At FICAP, several groups presented results which are not discussed in this paper, but have important bearing on it. The page number refers to the FICAP book of Abstracts of Contributed Papers (Heidelberg, July 22–26, 1974 ).Google Scholar

## Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1975