Universal aspects of neutron halos in light exotic nuclei

Tobias Frederico Instituto Tecnológico de Aeronáutica

São José dos Campos – Brazil tobias@ita.br

EFB22, Krakow, Sept. 12, 2013

T. Frederico et al. / Progress in Particle and Nuclear Physics 67 (2012) 939–994 941

Fig. 1. Illustrative section of the nuclear chart with isotopes of light halo nuclei with charge number (z) less than 7 and neutron number (N) limited to 16.In particular, we are pointing out the halo-nuclei that, within three-body n–n–core configurations, can be considered as Borromean systems.Source: Adapted from Ref. [12].

Fig. 2. The Borromean rings and the three-body Borromean system. The particular name came from the use of three connected circles in the coat of armsof the aristocratic Borromeo family in Italy.

weakly-bound three-body systems with two-neutron halos such as 22C, the core can be treated as a point-like structurelessparticle, when considering that most of its microscopic structure (with many neutrons and protons close together) are notaffecting the general universal properties of the three-body bound system. The effect of themicroscopic structure of the corein the halo properties are parameterized by the values of few number of observables, as the two- and three-body energies,which can be considered as inputs in effective models, as the renormalized zero range (RZR) approach proposed in [11].

In Fig. 1 we represent a section of the nuclear chart with isotopes of light halo nuclei that we are particularly concernedin this review, where halo effects have been shown to be more pronounced.

After the experimental discovery of the two-neutron halo in 11Li, it has been reported several other nuclear systemswith neutron halos and far from the stability line. The investigations on these nuclei, before the experiments reportedin [1], can be traced by following the 1979 review of Hansen [13], and one should realize that the first known halo-nucleuswas reported by Bjerge in 1936 [14]. It is the 6He, which is the longest-lived isotope of the ↵-particle, with a two-neutronhalo. For a more recent account on the properties of 6He, see Ref. [15]. We should note that both halo nuclei, 6He and 11Li,within three-body descriptions, n–n–core, have all the two-body subsystems (n–n and n–core) unbound, in what is knownas Borromean configurations. A bound system with three particles is known as Borromean when all the subsystems areunbound, resembling the case of the three topological circles that are linked together in such a way that the binding is lostif one of the rings is removed (see illustration in Fig. 2).

Nowadays many experimental facilities are used to study nuclei along the drip line in different countries and researchgroups (see e.g. [16]), with beams of exotic nuclei produced by differentmethods as described in Ref. [17]. The experimentalstatus on exotic nuclei can be traced through recent reviews, such as Refs. [18,19]. When approaching the limits of nuclearstability, there are also relevant new decay modes to be considered. A review of such decay modes occurring close to thedrip line can be found in Ref. [19].

The conditions for the occurrence of few-neutron halos in nuclei are reached when such neutrons are weakly boundto the core in the outermost orbits. The possibility of establishing dynamically long-range few-body correlations amongthe outermost neutrons and the core is at the basis of halo formation. Although, it looks reasonable to find large halos fornuclei near the drip line, when neutrons do not bind anymore, most of the experimental discoveries of large halos have beenconfined to relatively light nuclei. The existence of giant multi-neutron halos, not only with light but also with heavy cores,are still under investigation. A recent account on that can be found in Refs. [7,19].

990 T. Frederico et al. / Progress in Particle and Nuclear Physics 67 (2012) 939–994

presented in [298,299]. By considering a three-dimensional approach, without partial-wave decomposition, one can tracethe bibliography through Refs. [300–302]. In the near future, certainly, the knowledge and techniques used to treat nucleifar from the stability line in a few-body perspective will join to more complex situations, such as the case of the nuclearreaction 8B + 58Ni, within a three-body description, 7Be + p + 58Ni [303,304]. Other reactions, such as 6He + 208Pb, can beaddress to the four-body configuration n+n+4He+208Pb. This problemwas treated recentlywithin a four-body Continuum-Discretized Coupled-Channels (CDCC) [305,306]. In all the abovementioned situations the bound and continuum three-bodywave function will be necessary. From a simplified approach, the first three-body wave-function candidate would be thatconstructed from a renormalized zero-range model, once its long-range tail contains reliable information.

One theoretical perspective in halo physics is to investigate models that essentially carry few scales and present a richand universal phenomenology. The low-energy properties of the structure and reaction of few-neutron halo nuclei offerexciting possibilities to investigate the classically forbidden region, far from the interaction range, where the realm ofquantummechanics and non-locality are expressed by few-scales. In help to simplify the theoretical assumptions comes thePauli principle that restricts neutron-halos to require information beyond the three-body scale. The accretion of neutronsforming a halo on the top of a light and compact nuclear core is dominated essentially by at most one three-body scale,the neutron–core and neutron–neutron low-energy parameters like the cases of 12Li and 21C as three neutrons and a core.Furthermore, numerical tools to solve few-body problems are evolving rapidly, allowing the investigation of such largesystems, which certainly will give access to model descriptions of novel halo phenomena.

Acknowledgments

For discussions on some specific aspects of this review,wewould like to thankDr.Mohammadreza Hadizadeh, Dr. RaquelS. Marques de Carvalho, and Daneele S. Ventura. We also thank the Brazilian agencies Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa doEstado de São Paulo (FAPESP) and ConselhoNacional deDesenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq) for partial support.

References

[1] I. Tanihata, et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 55 (1985) 2676.[2] P.G. Hansen, B. Jonson, Europhys. Lett. 4 (1987) 409.[3] P. Egelhof, et al., Eur. J. Phys. A 15 (2002) 27.[4] R. Sánchez, et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 96 (2006) 033002.[5] K. Tanaka, et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 104 (2010) 062701.[6] M.T. Yamashita, R.S. Marques de Carvalho, T. Frederico, L. Tomio, Phys. Lett. B 697 (2011) 90.[7] P.D. Cottle, K.W. Kemper, Physics 5 (2012) 49.[8] R. Winkler, et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 108 (2012) 182501.[9] C.R. Hoffman, et al., Phys. Lett. B 672 (2009) 17.

[10] R. Kanungo, et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 102 (2009) 152501.[11] A.E. Amorim, T. Frederico, L. Tomio, Phys. Rev. C 56 (1997) R2378.[12] C.A. Bertulani, Nuclear Physics in a Nutshell, Princeton University Press, 2007.[13] P.G. Hansen, Annu. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 29 (1979) 69.[14] T. Bjerge, Nature 138 (1936) 400.[15] J.R. Armstrong, A cluster model of Helium-6 and Lithium-6, Michigan State University, Dissertation Thesis, 2007.[16] Y. Aksyutina, Light Unbound Nuclear Systems beyond the Dripline, Johann Wolfgang Goethe-Universität doctor Dissertation, in Frankfurt.[17] H. Geissel, G. Münzenberg, K. Riisager, Annu. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 45 (1995) 163.[18] T. Baumann, A. Spyrou, M. Thoennessen, Rep. Progr. Phys. 75 (2012) 036301.[19] M. Pfützner, M. Karny, L.V. Grigorenko, K. Riisager, Rev. Modern Phys. 84 (2012) 567.[20] P.G. Hansen, B.M. Sherrill, Nuclear Phys. A 693 (2001) 133.[21] P. Navratil, J.P. Vary, B.R. Barrett, Phys. Rev. C 62 (2000) 054311.[22] P. Maris, A.M. Shirokov, J.P. Vary, Phys. Rev. C 81 (2010) 021301.[23] R. Kanungo, The magic of star dust — exploring exotic nuclei, TRIUMF Financial Report 2007–2008, p. 10.

http://www.triumf.ca/sites/default/files/annual_financial_admin2008_0.pdf.[24] D. Steppenbeck, et al., Phys. Rev. C 81 (2010) 014305.[25] A.N. Deacon, et al., Phys. Rev. C 83 (2011) 064305. [See also, S.J. Freeman, B.J. Varley, A.N. Deacon, D. Steppenbeck, A.M. Howard, Spectroscopy

of exotic nuclei: exploring the changing shell structure, Nuclear Physics Group Report, Schuster Laboratory, The University of Manchester, andreferences therein].

[26] P.R.S. Gomes, L.F. Canto, J. Lubian, M.S. Hussein, Phys. Lett. B 695 (2011) 320.[27] M.S. Hussein, P.R.S. Gomes, J. Lubian, L.C. Chamon, Phys. Rev. C 73 (2006) 044610.[28] A.R. Garcia, et al., Phys. Rev. C 76 (2007) 067603.[29] P.G. Hansen, J.A. Tostevin, Annu. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 53 (2003) 219.[30] C. Détraz, D.J. Vieira, Annu. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 39 (1989) 407.[31] M.S. Hussein, R.A. Rego, C.A. Bertulani, Phys. Rep. 201 (1991) 279.[32] C.A. Bertulani, L.F. Canto, M.S. Hussein, Phys. Rep. 226 (1993) 281.[33] M.V. Zhukov, B.V. Danilin, D.V. Fedorov, J.M. Bang, I.J. Thompson, J.S. Vaagen, Phys. Rep. 231 (1993) 151.[34] P.G. Hansen, A.S. Jensen, B. Jonson, Annu. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 45 (1995) 591.[35] W. Mittig, A. Lépine-Szily, N.A. Orr, Annu. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 47 (1997) 27.[36] I. Tanihata, R. Kanungo, C. R. Phys. 4 (2003) 437.[37] F. Nunes, C. R. Phys. 4 (2003) 489.[38] J. Al-Khalili, Lecture Notes in Phys. 651 (2004) 77.[39] A.S. Jensen, K. Riisager, D.V. Fedorov, E. Garrido, Rev. Modern Phys. 76 (2004) 215.[40] B. Jonson, Phys. Rep. 389 (2004) 1.[41] L.F. Canto, P.R.S. Gomes, R. Donangelo, M.S. Hussein, Phys. Rep. 424 (2006) 1.[42] E. Nielsen, D.V. Fedorov, A.S. Jensen, E. Garrido, Phys. Rep. 347 (2001) 373.[43] E. Epelbaum, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 57 (2006) 654.

Light-neutron rich nuclei

T. Frederico et al. / Progress in Particle and Nuclear Physics 67 (2012) 939–994 941

Fig. 1. Illustrative section of the nuclear chart with isotopes of light halo nuclei with charge number (z) less than 7 and neutron number (N) limited to 16.In particular, we are pointing out the halo-nuclei that, within three-body n–n–core configurations, can be considered as Borromean systems.Source: Adapted from Ref. [12].

Fig. 2. The Borromean rings and the three-body Borromean system. The particular name came from the use of three connected circles in the coat of armsof the aristocratic Borromeo family in Italy.

weakly-bound three-body systems with two-neutron halos such as 22C, the core can be treated as a point-like structurelessparticle, when considering that most of its microscopic structure (with many neutrons and protons close together) are notaffecting the general universal properties of the three-body bound system. The effect of themicroscopic structure of the corein the halo properties are parameterized by the values of few number of observables, as the two- and three-body energies,which can be considered as inputs in effective models, as the renormalized zero range (RZR) approach proposed in [11].

In Fig. 1 we represent a section of the nuclear chart with isotopes of light halo nuclei that we are particularly concernedin this review, where halo effects have been shown to be more pronounced.

After the experimental discovery of the two-neutron halo in 11Li, it has been reported several other nuclear systemswith neutron halos and far from the stability line. The investigations on these nuclei, before the experiments reportedin [1], can be traced by following the 1979 review of Hansen [13], and one should realize that the first known halo-nucleuswas reported by Bjerge in 1936 [14]. It is the 6He, which is the longest-lived isotope of the ↵-particle, with a two-neutronhalo. For a more recent account on the properties of 6He, see Ref. [15]. We should note that both halo nuclei, 6He and 11Li,within three-body descriptions, n–n–core, have all the two-body subsystems (n–n and n–core) unbound, in what is knownas Borromean configurations. A bound system with three particles is known as Borromean when all the subsystems areunbound, resembling the case of the three topological circles that are linked together in such a way that the binding is lostif one of the rings is removed (see illustration in Fig. 2).

Nowadays many experimental facilities are used to study nuclei along the drip line in different countries and researchgroups (see e.g. [16]), with beams of exotic nuclei produced by differentmethods as described in Ref. [17]. The experimentalstatus on exotic nuclei can be traced through recent reviews, such as Refs. [18,19]. When approaching the limits of nuclearstability, there are also relevant new decay modes to be considered. A review of such decay modes occurring close to thedrip line can be found in Ref. [19].

The conditions for the occurrence of few-neutron halos in nuclei are reached when such neutrons are weakly boundto the core in the outermost orbits. The possibility of establishing dynamically long-range few-body correlations amongthe outermost neutrons and the core is at the basis of halo formation. Although, it looks reasonable to find large halos fornuclei near the drip line, when neutrons do not bind anymore, most of the experimental discoveries of large halos have beenconfined to relatively light nuclei. The existence of giant multi-neutron halos, not only with light but also with heavy cores,are still under investigation. A recent account on that can be found in Refs. [7,19].

TF, Delfino, Tomio, Yamashita, “Universal aspects of light halo nuclei Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 67 (2012) 939” Tanihata,Savajols Kanungo. “Recent experimental progress in nuclear halo structure studies Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 68 (2012) 215” Zinner, Jensen. ”Comparing and contrasting nuclei and cold atomic gases”. J. Phys. G: Nucl. Part. Phys. 40 (2013) 053101

11Li, 14Be, 20C, 22C

11Li

Two-neutron weakly bound s-wave three-body halo nuclei

9Li

n n

S2n = 369 keV - Smith et al. PRL101, 202501 (2008) Tanihata et al., PRL55, 2676 (1985)

Rnn~ 6-8 fm

< 3 fm

~ 6 fm

22C

20C

n n

~ 4 fm

~ 15 fm

Tanaka et al. PRL104, 062701 (2010)

S2n < 70 keV Mosby et al. NPA 909, 69 (2013)

Weakly bound quantum systems

•  Almost everywhere the wf is an eigenstate of H0 - short-range force

•  Physics: symmetry, scales and dimension (& mass ratios)

à Universality (model independence)

Generalization: “The few scales of nuclei and nuclear matter” Delfino, TF, Timóteo, Tomio. PLB 634 (2006) 185

Two-body s-wave:

k cot(�) = �1

a+

r02

k2 + · · ·|a| >> r0952 T. Frederico et al. / Progress in Particle and Nuclear Physics 67 (2012) 939–994

a

b

c

Fig. 4. In the left frame, we represent the analytic continuation of the integral J(k) given in (7) by deforming the contour of momentum q integration,to pick up the pole contribution into the negative half-momentum-plane, which corresponds to the second energy Riemann sheet. In the right frame, werepresent in the complex energy plane the particular case that a bound-state pole (in the first energy sheet) goes to a virtual-state pole (in the secondenergy sheet).

which can also be expressed in terms of the K -matrix equation (9). Instead of the K -matrix approach, one could also considerthe � -matrix formalism, developed in Refs. [187–189], which follows de Kowalski–Sasakawa class of formalisms [190–192]to compute scattering observables. These formalisms keep all the advantages of the K -matrix approach, with no fixed-pointsingularity in the kernel of the integral equation. An extra advantage, of particular interest in this kind of formalisms, reliesin their possibility to improve the iterative numerical convergence of the corresponding integral equations.

In order to contextualize the relevance of the basic two-body formalism included in this section, we should note that thisreview is mostly concerned with halo nuclei where the two body properties are quite relevant. Therefore, the knowledgeof what drives the physics of the core plus a nucleon is necessary. In many situations we will find situations where theneutron–core (n–c) system is unbound and the two-body information should be found by solving the analytical extension ofthe corresponding LS equation to reach virtual or resonant states. As an example, we can consider the case of 11Li, composedby a 9Li core plus two neutrons. In this case, the subsystem n–c , given by the 10Li, is unbound, and can be described bythe analytical extension of the corresponding LS equation, considering s-wave. On the other hand, virtual states in p-wavescan also be found for three-body non-Borromean halo nuclei, such as 20C with energy of about 1.6 times the correspondingneutron–core binding energy [193].

This may suggest further parameterizations of such non-Borromean three-body system, considering n–c as a virtualstate, which applies to the examples of 11Li and 14Be. It may be possible that instead of a virtual p-wave three-body state inthe non-Borromean situation, the Borromean halo nuclei presents a low-energy p-wave three-body resonance, or a PygmyDipole resonance. Itwas already shown [194] that a Borromean s-wave three-body systemhas low-energy resonanceswhichappears when the barely bound s-wave subsystems becomes unbound. Furthermore, in the p-wave case the centrifugalbarrier favors the formation of the continuum resonant state of the Borromean nuclei. Therefore, the appearance of aPygmy dipole resonance in Borromean configurations dominated by s-wave interactions can be classified also as a universalphenomena of two-neutron halo-nuclei [64].

2.1.2. Trajectory of S-matrix polesA particular case of two-body interaction that allows simple analytic solution for the LS equation is given in a separable

form. There is a family of such interactions, with one or more separable terms, constructed in the past to facilitate thesolution of the three-nucleon problem [195]. Let us consider, in s-wave, the case with one separable term, V = �|gihg|,with a Yamaguchi form factor given by

g(p) =NX

i=1

↵i

p2 + �2i. (15)

In this case, the potential and the corresponding two-body T -matrix are respectively given, in momentum space, by [181]

V (p, p0) = �g(p)g(p0), t(p, p0, k2) = ⌧ (k2) V (p, p0), (16)

where

⌧�1(k2) = 1 � 2⇡

Z 1

0p2dp

V (p, p)k2 � p2 + i"

= 1 � �NX

i,j=1

↵i↵j

(k + i�i) (k + i�j) (�i + �j). (17)

The interesting poles of the above separable T -matrix are the dynamical ones coming from ⌧ (k2), since those coming fromg(p)’s are given by the potential itself and are known as ‘static’ poles without physical meaning. For the case with N = 1 in(15), considering↵1 ⌘ 1 and�1 = � , the poles are located at k = �i�±i

q|�|2� , considering attractive interaction (� = �|�|).

The only one bound-state, which is supported by this interaction, occurs for |�| > 2�3, such that, for |�| < 2�3, we have

a > 0

a < 0

•  1S0 nn state Evirtual= -143 keV (a = -17fm) •  S n-core virtual (10Li ~ -25 keV) or bound (19C ~ 500 keV)

Three-boson

Subtle three-body phenomenum in L=0: Thomas-Efimov effect! 8

One three-body scale is necessary to represent short-range physics !!!! & discrete scaling

Thomas collapse (1935) Efimov effect (1970) roà 0 |a| à Route to collapse? infinitely many bound states

condensing at E=0

8

|a|/roà

Adhikari, Delfino,TF,Goldman,Tomio, PRA37 (1988) 3666

Jensen, Riisager, Fedorov, Garrido, RMP76, 215 (2004) Braaten, Hammer Phys. Rep.428, 259 (2006)

Efimov States – Bound and virtual states (3 identical bosons) Correlations between observables: Jensen, Fedorov,Yamashita, Hammer, Platter,

Gattobigio,Kievsky,Kolganova,Van Kolck,Bedaque,Phillips,...

[1] Cornelius, Glöckle. JCP 85, 1 (1996). [2] Huber. PRA31, 3981 (1985). [3] Barletta, Kievsky. PR A64, 042514 (2001). [4] Fedorov, Jensen. JPA34, 6003 (2001). [5] Kolganova, Motovilov, Sofianos. PRA 56, R1686 (1997).

N = 0 Cut

Subtraction

S-wave [1] S + D waves [1] [2] [3] [4] [5]

4He3 bound

virtual

Range correction: Thogersen, Fedorov, Jensen PRA78(2008)020501(R)

Scaling plot from zero range force T. Frederico et al. / Progress in Particle and Nuclear Physics 67 (2012) 939–994 959

1/a0

a > 0a < 0

Fig. 8. Schematic representation of the trajectory ofweakly-bound Efimov levels, as the inverse of the two-body scattering length a changes, fromunbound(a < 0) to bound (a > 0) two-body cases.

The trimer excited state can be bound, virtual or resonant states and it is represented in a single plot [203]. The fullsequence of states in Fig. 8 is resumed in the scaling plot of Fig. 9. In order to have sizable values for comparison, the two-body energy was subtracted from the excited three-body state, only in the cases that two-body is bound. The squares inFig. 8 corresponds to the transition from (I) to (II) and the inverted triangle from (III) to (IV).

The plot from [114] is presented in the form ofq

(E(N+1)3 � E2)/E

(N)3 for bound two-body systems; and in the form of

q(E(N+1)

3 )/E(N)3 in the other case. In Ref. [194] the trimer continuum resonant states were calculated for a virtual dimer and

shown in the figure. The results from realistic short-range interactions for the helium trimer are given in the figure andconfirm the model independence of the scaling function. Deviations due to the finite range can be seen in the right part ofthe plot, when the two-body binding increases and the scattering length decreases. As |a|/r0 decreases a deviation to theright of the curve is expected as the binding of an excited state is favored when the range increases as Fig. 9 shows. Indeed,this qualitative description of range corrections at the threshold are substantiated in Ref. [205].

In region (I) of Fig. 9, a trimer virtual state appears at the branch point 43✏2 of the one-particle exchange cut in the second

energy sheet and by further decreasing ✏2 it becomes bound in region (II) [frame (a) of Fig. 7]. When the scattering lengthturns to be negative in region (III) of Borromean binding, the excited state approaches the three-body scattering thresholdand turns to a continuum resonance in region (IV) [frame (b) of Fig. 7]. At the critical value of ✏crit

2B = 0.144✏(N)3 the virtual

state becomes bound above an Nth trimer state [114,158], which corresponds to Ecrit2 = 0.144E(N)

3 in the transition betweenregions (I) and (II). At the critical value of the virtual two-boson binding energy, ✏crit

2V = 8.82 ⇥ 10�4✏(N)3 [194], which

corresponds to Ecrit2V = 8.82 ⇥ 10�4E(N)

3 the excited state turns into a continuum resonance.The elastic boson-dimer s-wave scattering length tends towards �1 when the trimer virtual state approaches the

scattering threshold and then turns to +1 when the bound state is formed in the transition from region (I) to (II) in Fig. 9.The same analytical behavior appears in three-body systems with different particles, when at least one of the two-bodysubsystem is bound, as in the specific case of the low-energy s-wave neutron-19C scattering, where such dependence wasexplored in Ref. [180]. The trimer continuum resonance appears only in the Borromean region (IV) and it was observed asa peak in the three-atom recombination measured near a Feshbach resonance, for negative scattering lengths, in a cold gasof cesium atoms [147]. The experimental shift in the position of the peak with temperature was shown to be in agreementwith the dependence of the resonance energy with scattering length [211] (see also [212,213]). A theoretical descriptionof weakly-bound atomic trimers, and the three-body recombination in ultracold systems, considering the experimentalobservations, was reported in Refs. [214,215].

Another experimental evidence for the scaling plot of Fig. 9 comes from [216] where it was measured the ratio betweenthe scattering lengths corresponding to the trimer crossing the scattering threshold for a < 0 and a > 0 value of|a�

2 |/|a⇤2| = 10.4(5) (14) in a cold gas of trapped 7Li in the state |F = 1,mF = 1i. The value obtained from the scaling

curve of Fig. 9 in the zero-range model of |a�|/|a⇤| = 12.8 assuming that the reference trimer energy is unaltered frompositive to negative scattering lengths is in agreement with the experimental ratio.

2.3. Illustration: Born–Oppenheimer three-particle model

The Born–Oppenheimer three-particle model developed by Fonseca, Redish and Shanley in Ref. [107] is an analyticallysolvablemodelwhere the Efimov effect is clearly demonstrated, in a simpleway allowing for a better intuitive understandingof the physical mechanism leading to this effect. Other demonstrations of this effect, in general requires more sophisticated

•  Scaling limit: T. Frederico, LT, A. Delfino and E. A. Amorim, PRA60, R9 (1999) •  Limit cycle: Mohr et al Ann.Phys. 321 (2006)225 •  Correlation between observables: Phillips Plot 2and v.s. Etriton

Four-bosons Introduction Three-body Scaling Four-body Scaling Three- and Four-body interwoven cycles Summary

� � ��� �

��

����

� �� � � �

��

�� ��

Subtracted Green’s Functions: G(N)0 = 1

E�H0� 1

�µ2N�H0

with µ3 (RED): 3B scale & µ4 (BLUE): 4B scale

Yamashita, Tomio, Delfino, TF, EPL 75 (2006) 555.

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5

����B3 / B4

(N)

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

�������

(B4(N

+1) -B

3) / B

4(N)

Hiyama et al. PRA85 (2012)Gattobigio et al. PRA84 (2012)Deltuva PRA82 (2010) & arXiv:1202.0167Stecher JPB43 (2010)Stecher et al., Nat. Phy. 5 (2009)Stecher et al., Nat. Phys. 5 Suppl. (2009)Hammer et al. EPJA32 (2007)Hammer et al. EPJA32 (2007) [a>0]Hammer et al. EPJA32 (2007) [a<0]Hammer et al. EPJA32 (2007) [interpolation @ 1/a=0]Lazauskas et al. PRA73 (2006)Platter et al. PRA70 (2004)Blume et al. JCP112 (2000)

B3/B2=50.01 (a>0)

B3/B2=229.45 (a>0)

B3/B2=498.60 (a>0)

B3/B2=50.01 (a<0)

B2=0

��122.7

10-6

10-4

10-2

100

B3

(0)

10-6

10-4

10-2

100

B4(N

) N=0

N=1

N=2

10-6

10-4

10-2

100

B2

B3(N

)

N=0

N=1

N=2

(a) (b)

B2=0

a = 1

Hadizadeh, Yamashita,Tomio, Delfino, TF, PRL107, 135304 (2011

H.W.  Hammer  and  L.  Pla.er,  Universal  proper6es  of  the  four-­‐body  system  with  large  sca.ering  lengths,  European  Physical  Journal  32,  113  (2007)  

•  Zero-range potential - EFT •  Three-body repulsive potential to deal with the Thomas collapse

Repulsive interaction at short distances kills the four-body scale. How to check the 4-boson scale? Use an attractive interaction

J.  von  Stecher,  J.P.  D'Incao  ,  C.H.  Greene,  Signatures  of  universal  four-­‐body  phenomena  and  their  rela6on  to  the  Efimov  effect,  Nature  Physics  5,  417  (2009).  

• Two-body Gaussian potential - Stochastic variational method

How to check 4-boson scale? Disentangle the scales by a four-body potential

Experimental  verifica6on?   Technique  to  tune  three  or  four-­‐body  poten6als!!!!  

M. Gattobigio, A. Kievsky, M. Viviani, Energy spectra of small bosonic clusters having a large two-body scattering length, Physical Review A 86, 042513 (2012).

• Two-body Gaussian LM2M2 potentials - Hyperspherical formalism

Fedorov, Jensen, Riisager, “Efimov states in halo nuclei” PRL73 (1994) 2817.

14Be 18C 20C

Mazumdar, Bhasin, “Efimov effect in the nuclear halo 14Be nucleus” PRC 56 (1997) R5.

Mazumdar, Arora, Bhasin, ”Three-body analysis of the occurrence of Efimov states in 2n halo nuclei such as 19B, 22C, and 20C”, PRC61 (2000) 051303

Amorim, TF, Tomio "Universal aspects of Efimov states and light halo nuclei", PRC 56, R2378 (1997)

Bertulani, Hammer, van Kolck, "Effective field theory for halo nuclei: shallow p-wave states", NPA712 (2002) 37

Halo Nuclei and Efimov physics (n+n+core)

Halo Nuclei and EFT

Halo Nuclei, EFT and Efimov physics Hammer, Platter, ”Efimov States in Nuclear and Particle Physics”, Annu. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 60 (2010) 207

RAPID COMMUNICATIONS

FIRST OBSERVATION OF EXCITED STATES IN 12Li PHYSICAL REVIEW C 81, 021302(R) (2010)

Cou

nts

80

60

40

20

0

Decay Energy (MeV)2.01.51.00.50.0

FIG. 2. 12Li decay energy spectrum. The solid line correspondsto the sum of simulations of an s ground state (dotted) and twod excited states with decay energies of 250 keV (dot-dashed) and555 keV (dashed).

single d-wave resonance or s-wave component. The extractedresonance energies for the two excited states were 250(20) keVand 555(20) keV, respectively. The measured widths of thesetwo resonances states were dominated by detector resolutionand only upper limits of 15 and 80 keV, respectively, could beextracted.

11Li does not have any bound excited states, therefore theobserved coincidences between a neutron and 11Li correspondto the decay of 12Li to the ground state of 11Li. The s-wavecomponent of the decay energy spectrum corresponds to theground state of 12Li. As mentioned before the properties of thes-wave component included in the fit were taken from Ref. [5].Thus 12Li is unbound with respect to neutron emission by120(15) keV. The other two resonances at decay energies of250(20) and 555(20) keV represent excited states at energiesof 130(25) and 435(25) keV, respectively.

Although it is not possible to deduce the spin and paritiesof each observed state from the decay energy spectrumalone, the selectivity of the two-proton removal reactioncan give insight about the probability of populating certainstates and possibly explain the differences with respect to thedecay energy spectrum observed in the 1H(14Be,2pn)12Li. Inaddition to the different beams (14B and 14Be), the two maindifferences between this and the present reaction are the beamenergies and targets. While the 14Be reaction was performed at360 MeV/u on a hydrogen target the present experiment useda 53.4-MeV/u 14B beam on a beryllium target. Possible targetdependent differences of reaction mechanisms at relativisticenergies were recently discussed in the decay of 7He [21]. Inaddition, the data from the 14Be reaction could possibly containneutrons from the decay of 13Li which can be populated in the(p,2p) reaction.

The two-proton removal reaction from 14B will most likelyremove two protons from the p shell without disturbingthe neutron configurations [22,23]. The ground state of 14Bhas a spin and parity of 2! [24,25] and the neutrons areexpected to be "30% and "66% in the !(0d5/2)1 and !(1s1/2)1

configurations, respectively [20]. Shell-model calculationsusing the WBP interaction [26] in the s-p-sd-pf model spaceare consistent with this configuration of the 14Be ground state.With a valence proton in the " (0p3/2)1 configuration 12Li canbe formed in odd-parity states from 1! to 4!.

Li12

Li+n11Ref. [13] WBPExp.

4_

2_

1_

2_

4_

1_

0

1000

E* (keV)

130(25)

435(25) 410

730

1149

1564

3/2_

FIG. 3. Level and decay scheme of 12Li. The measured states arecompared to shell-model calculations from Ref. [11] and with theWBP interaction.

Figure 3 compares the data with shell-model calculationsfrom Ref. [11] and with the WBP interaction [26]. While theearlier calculations predict two excited states below 1 MeVconsistent with the data, the more recent WBP interactionpredicts the first excited state to be located above 1 MeV.However, it should be noted that these are continuum statesand the accuracy of the shell-model calculations for thesestates is about 1 MeV [27]. The observation of an l = 0to the I" = 3/2! ground state of 11Li implies a I" = 2!

assignment for the ground state of 12Li consistent with theWBP calculations. A 4! assignment predicted by the earliershell-model calculations [11] cannot be correct because thel = 0 decay is forbidden.

The 4! state can decay only by the emission of anl = 2 neutron and likely corresponds to the observed firstexcited state. The calculated single-particle width for thisdecay at a decay energy of 250 keV is about 15 keV whichcoincides with the observed upper limit for the width of thisresonance.

The calculated single-particle width for an l = 2 decayat 555 keV is about 80 keV, which again agrees with themeasured upper limit of the width. Unless forbidden, the l = 2decay competes with the emission of an l = 0 neutron whichis favored by about a factor of 50 at this energy. Thus, the

TABLE I. Calculated levels of 12Li using the WBP interaction.The excitation energy (E#), spin and parity (I" ), and the spectroscopicfactors (SF) of the s- and d-wave component with respect to theground state of 11Li are listed.

E# I" SF(MeV)

s1/2 d5/2

0 2! 0.60 0.181.149 4! – 0.851.564 1! 0.83 0.012.758 2! 0.22 0.582.797 1! 0.01 0.81

021302-3

RAPID COMMUNICATIONS

PHYSICAL REVIEW C 81, 021302(R) (2010)

First observation of excited states in 12Li

C. C. Hall,1 E. M. Lunderberg,1 P. A. DeYoung,1,* T. Baumann,2 D. Bazin,2 G. Blanchon,3 A. Bonaccorso,4 B. A. Brown,2,5

J. Brown,6 G. Christian,2,5 D. H. Denby,1 J. Finck,7 N. Frank,2,5,† A. Gade,2,5 J. Hinnefeld,8 C. R. Hoffman,9,10 B. Luther,11

S. Mosby,2,5 W. A. Peters,2,5,‡ A. Spyrou,2,5 and M. Thoennessen2,5

1Department of Physics, Hope College, Holland, Michigan 49423, USA2National Superconducting Cyclotron Laboratory, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan 48824, USA

3CEA, DAM, DIF F-91297 Arpajon, France4Instituto Nazionale di Fisisca Nucleare, Sez. di Pisa, Largo Pontecorvo 3, 56127 Pisa, Italy

5Department of Physics and Astronomy, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan 48824, USA6Department of Physics, Wabash College, Crawfordsville, Indiana 47933, USA

7Department of Physics, Central Michigan University, Mt. Pleasant, Michigan 48859, USA8Department of Physics and Astronomy, Indiana University at South Bend, South Bend, Indiana 46634, USA

9Department of Physics, Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida 32306, USA10Physics Division, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, Illinois 60439, USA11Department of Physics, Concordia College, Moorhead, Minnesota 56562, USA

(Received 4 December 2009; published 10 February 2010)

The neutron-unbound ground state and two excited states of 12Li were formed by the two-proton removalreaction from a 53.4-MeV/u 14B beam. The decay energy spectrum of 12Li was measured with the ModularNeutron Array (MoNA) and the Sweeper dipole superconducting magnet at the National SuperconductingCyclotron Laboratory. Two excited states at resonance energies of 250 ± 20 keV and 555 ± 20 keV were observedfor the first time and the data are consistent with the previously reported s-wave ground state with a scatteringlength of as = !13.7 fm.

DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevC.81.021302 PACS number(s): 21.10.Dr, 25.60.!t, 29.30.Hs

Since the first report of an extended matter radius [1] 11Lihas been one of the most thoroughly studied halo nuclei andcontinues to be the subject of intense studies [2,3]. Althoughit is expected that 11Li is the heaviest bound lithium isotope,properties of the heavier Li isotopes must be measured to locatethe neutron dripline for Z = 3 and further refine the nuclearshell-model calculations. A step toward these goals comesfrom characterizing 12Li. 12Li is known to be unstable [4]and the energy of the presumed ground state was reported inRef. [5]. Here we confirm the earlier findings but also reporton excited states in 12Li for the first time. This understandingof 12Li states will also be useful for understanding the nextobvious measurement, that of 13Li, which, if it is unbound,will decay by the emission of two neutrons to 11Li. Theincreased availability of intense radioactive beams has enabledspectroscopic studies of nuclei far from stability and inparticular the selectivity of direct reactions at intermediateenergies has been instrumental in populating and identifyingstates in neutron-rich systems [6,7]. In these studies thedripline is not limiting the exploration of the structure of veryneutron-rich nuclei and direct reactions were successfully usedin measuring the structure of very neutron-rich nuclei (see, forexample, Refs. [5,8–10]).

*deyoung@hope.edu†Present address: Physics Department, Augustana College, Rock

Island, Illinois 61201, USA.‡Present address: Oak Ridge Associated Universities, Oak Ridge,

Tennessee 37831, USA.

In this measurement, we have utilized the two-protonremoval reaction from 14B to populate states in the unbound nu-cleus 12Li. The ground state of 12Li has recently been measuredfor the first time in the knockout reaction 1H(14Be,2pn)12Li[5]. No excited states were observed in this reaction. Theground state was interpreted as a virtual s state with a scatteringlength of as = !13.7(16) fm. The spin and parity of thisresonance was deduced as either a 1! or a 2! in contradictionto early shell-model calculations which predicted the groundstate to be a 4! state [11]. These shell-model calculationsalso predicted two excited states at rather low energies of410 keV (2!) and 730 keV (1!). The ground state of 14B, thesecondary beam, has spin and parity of 2! and the two-protonremoval reaction should populate these negative parity statesin 12Li.

The experiment was performed at the Coupled CyclotronFacility of the National Superconducting Cyclotron Labo-ratory (NSCL) at Michigan State University. The A1900fragment separator [12] was used to produce a 53.4-MeV/u14B secondary beam from a 120-MeV/u 18O primary beam.The momentum acceptance of the A1900 was set at 1%. Eventby event time-of-flight measurements between two plasticscintillators located at the A1900 and in front of the reactiontarget, respectively, allowed for identification and removalof events caused by unwanted contaminant in the secondarybeam. The 14B beam impinged upon a 477-mg/cm2 Be targetand produced 12Li through two-proton knockout. The 12Lidecayed immediately into 11Li and a neutron which weredetected in coincidence.

The 11Li fragments were deflected by the Sweeper super-conducting dipole magnet [13] which was set to a magnetic

0556-2813/2010/81(2)/021302(4) 021302-1 ©2010 The American Physical Society

RAPID COMMUNICATIONS

PHYSICAL REVIEW C 81, 021302(R) (2010)

First observation of excited states in 12Li

C. C. Hall,1 E. M. Lunderberg,1 P. A. DeYoung,1,* T. Baumann,2 D. Bazin,2 G. Blanchon,3 A. Bonaccorso,4 B. A. Brown,2,5

J. Brown,6 G. Christian,2,5 D. H. Denby,1 J. Finck,7 N. Frank,2,5,† A. Gade,2,5 J. Hinnefeld,8 C. R. Hoffman,9,10 B. Luther,11

S. Mosby,2,5 W. A. Peters,2,5,‡ A. Spyrou,2,5 and M. Thoennessen2,5

1Department of Physics, Hope College, Holland, Michigan 49423, USA2National Superconducting Cyclotron Laboratory, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan 48824, USA

3CEA, DAM, DIF F-91297 Arpajon, France4Instituto Nazionale di Fisisca Nucleare, Sez. di Pisa, Largo Pontecorvo 3, 56127 Pisa, Italy

5Department of Physics and Astronomy, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan 48824, USA6Department of Physics, Wabash College, Crawfordsville, Indiana 47933, USA

7Department of Physics, Central Michigan University, Mt. Pleasant, Michigan 48859, USA8Department of Physics and Astronomy, Indiana University at South Bend, South Bend, Indiana 46634, USA

9Department of Physics, Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida 32306, USA10Physics Division, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, Illinois 60439, USA11Department of Physics, Concordia College, Moorhead, Minnesota 56562, USA

(Received 4 December 2009; published 10 February 2010)

The neutron-unbound ground state and two excited states of 12Li were formed by the two-proton removalreaction from a 53.4-MeV/u 14B beam. The decay energy spectrum of 12Li was measured with the ModularNeutron Array (MoNA) and the Sweeper dipole superconducting magnet at the National SuperconductingCyclotron Laboratory. Two excited states at resonance energies of 250 ± 20 keV and 555 ± 20 keV were observedfor the first time and the data are consistent with the previously reported s-wave ground state with a scatteringlength of as = !13.7 fm.

DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevC.81.021302 PACS number(s): 21.10.Dr, 25.60.!t, 29.30.Hs

Since the first report of an extended matter radius [1] 11Lihas been one of the most thoroughly studied halo nuclei andcontinues to be the subject of intense studies [2,3]. Althoughit is expected that 11Li is the heaviest bound lithium isotope,properties of the heavier Li isotopes must be measured to locatethe neutron dripline for Z = 3 and further refine the nuclearshell-model calculations. A step toward these goals comesfrom characterizing 12Li. 12Li is known to be unstable [4]and the energy of the presumed ground state was reported inRef. [5]. Here we confirm the earlier findings but also reporton excited states in 12Li for the first time. This understandingof 12Li states will also be useful for understanding the nextobvious measurement, that of 13Li, which, if it is unbound,will decay by the emission of two neutrons to 11Li. Theincreased availability of intense radioactive beams has enabledspectroscopic studies of nuclei far from stability and inparticular the selectivity of direct reactions at intermediateenergies has been instrumental in populating and identifyingstates in neutron-rich systems [6,7]. In these studies thedripline is not limiting the exploration of the structure of veryneutron-rich nuclei and direct reactions were successfully usedin measuring the structure of very neutron-rich nuclei (see, forexample, Refs. [5,8–10]).

*deyoung@hope.edu†Present address: Physics Department, Augustana College, Rock

Island, Illinois 61201, USA.‡Present address: Oak Ridge Associated Universities, Oak Ridge,

Tennessee 37831, USA.

In this measurement, we have utilized the two-protonremoval reaction from 14B to populate states in the unbound nu-cleus 12Li. The ground state of 12Li has recently been measuredfor the first time in the knockout reaction 1H(14Be,2pn)12Li[5]. No excited states were observed in this reaction. Theground state was interpreted as a virtual s state with a scatteringlength of as = !13.7(16) fm. The spin and parity of thisresonance was deduced as either a 1! or a 2! in contradictionto early shell-model calculations which predicted the groundstate to be a 4! state [11]. These shell-model calculationsalso predicted two excited states at rather low energies of410 keV (2!) and 730 keV (1!). The ground state of 14B, thesecondary beam, has spin and parity of 2! and the two-protonremoval reaction should populate these negative parity statesin 12Li.

The experiment was performed at the Coupled CyclotronFacility of the National Superconducting Cyclotron Labo-ratory (NSCL) at Michigan State University. The A1900fragment separator [12] was used to produce a 53.4-MeV/u14B secondary beam from a 120-MeV/u 18O primary beam.The momentum acceptance of the A1900 was set at 1%. Eventby event time-of-flight measurements between two plasticscintillators located at the A1900 and in front of the reactiontarget, respectively, allowed for identification and removalof events caused by unwanted contaminant in the secondarybeam. The 14B beam impinged upon a 477-mg/cm2 Be targetand produced 12Li through two-proton knockout. The 12Lidecayed immediately into 11Li and a neutron which weredetected in coincidence.

The 11Li fragments were deflected by the Sweeper super-conducting dipole magnet [13] which was set to a magnetic

0556-2813/2010/81(2)/021302(4) 021302-1 ©2010 The American Physical Society

Pauli principle kills sensitivity to the 4-body scale!

12Li =9 Li+ n+ n+ n

(n+n+n+core)

Scales of s-wave n-n-c system: contact interaction

Energy of the virtual nn system

Energy of the bound/virtual nc system

Energy of the Nth state of the nnc system

A = mass of the core

Root mean square radii Scaling functions for the radii

⎟⎟⎠

⎞⎜⎜⎝

⎛Α±±=

⎟⎟⎠

⎞⎜⎜⎝

⎛Α±±=

,,

,,

333

2

333

2

EE

EEREr

EE

EEREr

ABAACM

ABAAAA

γγ

γγ

γ = A or B + two-body bound state - two-body virtual state

Build constraints!

B

A A

CM

System  size  for  fixed  3-­‐body  binding  

Root mean square radii: Core+neutron+neutron

Root mean square radii: Core+neutron+neutron Yamashita, Tomio and T. F. NPA 735, 40 (2004) Canham and Hammer

NPA 836 (2010) 275

•  Moriguchi et al. PRC88, 024610 (2013) - RIKEN reaction cross-section rn ~ 6.1 fm

•  S2n=369 keV Smith et al. PRL101(2008) •  IMPROVE Ev[10Li] !

Nucleus B3 [keV] Enc [keV] r0 [fm]!

!r2nn" [fm]!

!r2nc" [fm]!

!r2n" [fm]!

!r2c " [fm]11Li 247 -25 0.0 8.7±0.7 7.1±0.5 6.5±0.5 1.0±0.1

247 -25 1.4 8.80±0.07 7.21±0.06 6.51±0.05 1.040±0.008

247 -800 [48] 0.0 6.8±1.8 5.9±1.5 5.3±1.4 0.9±0.2

247 -800 [48] 1.4 6.3±0.5 5.5±0.4 4.9±0.4 0.81±0.0614Be 1120 -200 [49] 0.0 4.1±0.5 3.5±0.5 3.2±0.4 0.40±0.05

1120 -200 [49] 1.4 3.86±0.09 3.29±0.08 3.02±0.07 0.384±0.00912Be 3673 503 0.0 3.0±0.6 2.5±0.5 2.3±0.5 0.32±0.07

3673 503 1.4 3.3±0.2 2.7±0.1 2.5±0.1 0.35±0.0218C 4940 731 0.0 2.6±0.7 2.2±0.6 2.1±0.5 0.18±0.05

4940 731 1.4 2.9±0.2 2.4±0.2 2.3±0.2 0.21±0.0120C 3506 530 [45] 0.0 3.0±0.7 2.5±0.6 2.4±0.5 0.19±0.04

3506 530 [45] 1.4 3.38±0.18 2.75±0.15 2.60±0.14 0.21±0.01

3506 162 0.0 2.8±0.3 2.4±0.3 2.3±0.3 0.19±0.02

3506 162 1.4 3.03±0.06 2.53±0.05 2.39±0.05 0.198±0.004

3506 60 0.0 2.8±0.2 2.3±0.2 2.2±0.2 0.18±0.01

3506 60 1.4 2.84±0.03 2.41±0.03 2.28±0.03 0.192±0.00220C* 65.0±6.8 60 0.0 42±3 38±3 41±3 2.2±0.220C* 64.9±0.7 60 1.4 43.2±0.5 38.7±0.4 42.9±0.5 2.26±0.02

TABLE I: Various mean square radii of di!erent halo nuclei. The second two columns show theinput values for the three-body ground state energy and the two-body n-c energy (negative valuescorresponding to virtual energies), respectively, as given by [39], except where otherwise noted. The

fourth column shows the input value for both two-body e!ective ranges, related to LO (r0 = 0.0fm) or NLO (r0 = 1.4 fm) calculations. The rows marked by 20C* show the results for the excited

Efimov state of 20C, with binding energy displayed in the second column, which is found above theground state (B3 = 3506 keV).

calculated exactly as was done in the previous subsection, using the sum of the uncertaintiesfrom the n-n and n-c interactions: !!r2"/!r2" # (rnn/ann)2 + r2nc(2µncEnc). We stress thatour NLO results as well as their errors are based on our estimate of the e"ective range,r0 = 1.4 fm. They do not include the uncertainty in the estimate of r0 and therefore mustbe interpreted with some care.

We will now discuss the results for the NLO corrections to the mean square radii dueto the e"ective range of the interactions. For the Borromean halo nuclei 11Li and 14Be, inwhich all two-body subsystems are unbound, the general tendency is for a positive e"ectiverange to shift all mean square radii to smaller values. The only exception is the case of 11Liusing the central value of the n-c energy Enc = ($25 ± 15) keV [39]. This di"erence is dueto the fact that this value of the virtual energy is very close to the resonant limit, Enc = 0.0,while the competing value Enc = ($800± 250) keV [48] is much larger in comparison. Thiscan be seen more clearly if we look at the mean square radii over a range of Enc values.Using the central value of the three-body binding energy as input, B(0)

3 = 247 keV, the NLOresults are plotted in comparison to the LO values in Fig. 2, with error bands estimatedfrom the theoretical uncertainty, as described above. The solid black lines represent the LO

10

( )( )( ) ( )∫

∫ʹ′

Φ=

nnA

AAAAnn qqqd

pqqdpC

ρρ3

23 ,

pA

qA

A

n n' 2A

Anqpq

−=ʹ′ 2

AAnqpq

−−=

One-body density ( ) ∫ ⎟⎠

⎞⎜⎝

⎛ −−−Φ= ʹ′

ʹ′ʹ′

23

2, AnnAAnnAAnnA

qqqqqdq

ρ

( )AA pq ,Φ≡Φ Breakup amplitude including the FSI between the neutrons

( ) ( ) ( )∫ +−

Ψ

−+Ψ=Φ

επ

ipppqpd

ipEpq

A

A

AnnAA 22

32 ,2/1,

Ψ is the three-body wave function

Neutron-neutron correlation function

0 20 40 60 800

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

0 100 200 300 4000

2

4

6

8

10

14Be

C

nn

pA[MeV/c]

F. M. Marqués et al. Phys. Rev. C 64, 061301 (2001)

F. M. Marqués et al. Phys. Lett. B 476, 219 (2000)

E3 = 1.337 MeV EnA = 0.2 MeV Enn = 0.143 MeV

asymptotic region ?

x1.425

Neutron-neutron correlation function

Yamashita, TF, Tomio PRC 72, 011601(R) (2005)

F. M. Marqués et al. Phys. Rev. C 64, 061301 (2001)

M. Petrascu et al. Nucl. Phys. A 738, 503 (2004)

E3 = 0.29 MeV EnA = 0.05 MeV

0 20 40 60 800

2

4

6

8

10

12

0 100 2000

1

2

3

4

5

6

11Li

Cnn

pA[MeV/c]

Enn = 0.143 MeV

E3 = 0.37 MeV EnA = 0.8 MeV E3 = 0.37 MeV EnA = 0.05 MeV

x2.5

Neutron-neutron correlation function

Amorim,TF,Tomio PRC56(1997)2378

Threshold for an excited Efimov state: Halo-nuclei

Borromean

Samba

Tango

All-bound

Knn=(Bnn)1/2

Knc=(Bnc)1/2

nn virtual nn bound

nc virtual

nc bound

Critical condition for an excited (N+1)-th above the N-th state:

Canham and Hammer EPJ A 37 (2008) 367; NPA 836 (2010) 275

976 T. Frederico et al. / Progress in Particle and Nuclear Physics 67 (2012) 939–994

Fig. 13. Three-dimensional schematic plot, combining the results of the boundary region to exist at least one Efimov state in an n–n–c system, given inFig. 12, with the part of the scaling plot shown in Fig. 9 corresponding to bound identical three-boson systems. In the defined z-axis, E2 is fixed to zero forthe cases that the two-body system is in a virtual state.Source: Extracted from Ref. [46].

originally, in Refs. [67,254,255]. These nuclei are characterized by the small values of the one or two neutrons separationenergies. We describe them by an inert core of mass mc and two weakly-bound neutrons. Thus, we have two possiblepairwise interactions, one for neutron–core and another for neutron–neutron system.

The positions of the carbon isotopes with mass numbers 18, 20 and 22, considered as two-halo systems, are representedin the boundary plot given in Fig. 12, as examples, in view of their specific characteristics with the corresponding availableexperimental data. By considering the available data of other well-known halo-nuclei, such as 11Li and 12Be, it was found noroom for an excited Efimov state within this three-body approach, such that their corresponding point will be outside thelimiting region represented in Fig. 12. The position of 12Be in this representation can be seen in Fig. 6 of Ref. [46]. In the casesthat we have shown, one should also note that the isotope 18C is excluded to have an excited halo state. The situation ismorefavorable (to have an excited Efimov state) in the other two represented cases, 20C and 22C, as they are close to the criticalboundary. For 22C, it may also be the case that the two-neutron halo presents a continuum resonance [6]. This halo nucleisystem will be discussed in the Section 4.4.3 of this review, where results of calculations for the mean-square-distance ofa halo neutron with respect to the center-of-mass of 22C are presented. The model assumption, as considered in Ref. [6], isthat n-20C is unbound, with a virtual state energy near zero.

The region where we have bound excited three-body systems can also be represented in a three-dimensional plot, asgiven in Ref. [46] and shown in Fig. 13. The figure is a schematic representation combining Figs. 9 and 12, where the surface

(x ⌘qEnn/E

(N)3 , y ⌘

qEnc/E

(N)3 ) defines the limiting region in order to have at least one excited bound Efimov state. Outside

this surface region (for larger x and/or y) the three-body state will be virtual or resonant, as we have discussed. In the nextfollowing section, using the zero-range two-body interactions,we revise some studies on the sizes ofweakly-bound systems,in the case we have two identical particles, such as exotic halo nuclei n–n–c , or mixing of two kind of atoms (↵–↵–�). SeeRef. [256], discussed in the context of cold-atom systems, for some universal dynamical aspects of binary mixtures.

In the zero-range limit and leaving out the core spin, there are two possibilities for each n–n and n–core two-bodysubsystems, as they can be bound (+) or virtual (�). By considering � = n or c , we introduce the following definitions:

Kn� ⌘ ±vuut

�����En�E(N)3

�����, wherep|En� | = 1

p2mn� an�

. (103)

In the above, mn� and an� are, respectively, the reduced mass and scattering length of the particle pair n� . In the scalinglimit, the consecutive (N + 1)th and Nth three-body energy levels are related by a scaling function, which can be writtenas:

E(N+1)3

E(N)3

= F (Knn, Knc; A), (104)

where A ⌘ mc/mn. The extreme conditions for the existence of the (N + 1)th excited state on the top of the Nth state, aredescribed by the following critical conditions:

F (Knn, Knc; A) = 0, (105)

analytic structure & Efimov state trajectory

20C virtual Efimov state

Arora, Mazumdar, Bhasin PRC69 (2004)061301(R) Mazumdar, Rau, Bhasin PRL97(2006)062503 Efimov stateàFano resonance of n+19C by changing Enc

18C

n n

S2n= 3.5 MeV Enc=160 ± 110 keV

Yamashita, TF,Tomio, PRL99 (2007)269201 & PLB660(2008)339 Efimov state à virtual state by changing Enc

Efimov state in 20C goes to a virtual state for |E19C| > 165keV !

Excited Efimov bound state

Virtual Efimov state

Excited Efimov bound state

Virtual Efimov state

Critical value: |E19C|=165keV

T. Frederico et al. / Progress in Particle and Nuclear Physics 67 (2012) 939–994 993

[205] M. Thøgersen, D.V. Fedorov, A.S. Jensen, Phys. Rev. A 78 (2008) 020501(R).[206] Th. Cornelius, W. Glöckle, J. Chem. Phys. 85 (1986) 3906.[207] S. Huber, Phys. Rev. A 31 (1985) 3981.[208] S. Huber, Phys. Rev. A 33 (1986) 2825.[209] B.D. Esry, C.D. Lin, C.H. Greene, Phys. Rev. A 54 (1996) 394.[210] E.A. Kolganova, A.K. Motovilov, S.A. Sofianos, Phys. Rev. A 56 (1987) R1686.[211] M.T. Yamashita, T. Frederico, L. Tomio, Phys. Lett. A 363 (2007) 468.[212] S. Jonsell, Europhys. Lett. 76 (2006) 8.[213] P. Massignan, H.T.C. Stoof, Phys. Rev. A 78 (2008) 030701.[214] M.T. Yamashita, T. Frederico, A. Delfino, L. Tomio, Phys. Rev. A 68 (2003) 033406.[215] L. Tomio, V.S. Filho, M.T. Yamashita, A. Gammal, T. Frederico, Few-Body Syst. 34 (2004) 191.[216] S.E. Pollack, D. Dries, R.G. Hulet, Science 326 (2009) 1683.[217] R.K. Bhaduri, A. Chatterjee, B.P. van Zyl, Amer. J. Phys. 79 (2011) 274.[218] A. Delfino, T. Frederico, Phys. Rev. C 53 (1996) 62.[219] S. Weinberg, Nuclear Phys. B 363 (1991) 3.[220] S. Weinberg, Phys. Lett. B 295 (1992) 114.[221] H. Georgi, Nuclear Phys. B 361 (1991) 339.[222] H. Georgi, Annu. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sc. 43 (1993) 209.[223] M.P. Valderrama, E.R. Arriola, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 323 (2008) 1037.[224] K.G. Wilson, Phys. Rev. D 2 (1970) 1473.[225] K.G. Wilson, J. Kogut, Phys. Rep. 12 (1974) 75.[226] K.G. Wilson, Rev. Mod. Phys. 55 (1983) 583.[227] M.E. Fisher, Rev. Mod. Phys. 70 (1998) 653.[228] J. Zinn-Justin, Quantum Field Theory and Critical Phenomena, Claredon Press-Oxford, 1989.[229] S. Weinberg, The Quantum Theory of Fields Vol. I, Foundations, Cambridge University Press, 1995; The Quantum Theory of Fields Vol. II, Modern

Applications, Cambridge University Press, 1996.[230] M.T. Yamashita, T. Frederico, L. Tomio, Phys. Rev. C 72 (2005) 011601(R).[231] A. Nogga, R.G.E. Timmermans, U. van Kolck, Phys. Rev. C 72 (2005) 054006.[232] C.J. Yang, C. Elster, D.R. Phillips, Phys. Rev. C 77 (2008) 014002.[233] S. Szpigel, V.S. Timóteo, F. de O. Durães, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 326 (2011) 364.[234] V.S. Timóteo, S. Szpigel, F.O. Durães, Few-Body Syst. 50 (2011) 247.[235] K. Harada, K. Inoue, H. Kubo, Phys. Lett. B 636 (2006) 305.[236] H.-W. Hammer, L. Platter, Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. Lond. A 369 (2011) 2679.[237] L. Platter, H.-W. Hammer, U.-G. Meissner, Phys. Rev. A 70 (2004) 52101.[238] R. Higa, Few-Body Syst. 44 (2008) 125.[239] R. Higa, Few-Body Syst. 50 (2011) 251.[240] R. Higa, H.-W. Hammer, U. van Kolck, Nuclear Phys. A 809 (2008) 171.[241] B.A. Gelman, Phys. Rev. C 80 (2009) 034005.[242] T. Frederico, H.-C. Pauli, Phys. Rev. D 64 (2001) 054007.[243] D. Lee, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 63 (2009) 117.[244] E. Epelbaum, H. Krebs, D. Lee, U.-G. Meissner, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106 (2011) 192501.[245] T.D. Cohen, B.A. Gelman, U. van Kolck, Phys. Lett. B 588 (2004) 57.[246] V. Lensky, M.C. Birse, Eur. Phys. J. A 47 (2011) 142.[247] S.-I. Ando, M.C. Birse, J. Phys. G 37 (2010) 105108.[248] S. König, H.-W. Hammer, Phys. Rev. C 83 (2011) 064001.[249] M.T. Yamashita, L. Tomio, A. Delfino, T. Frederico, Europhys. Lett. 75 (2006) 555.[250] J. von Stecher, J.P. D’Incao, C.H. Greene, Nature Phys. 5 (2009) 417.[251] A. Deltuva, Phys. Rev. A 82 (2010) 040701(R). (2010). arXiv:1009.1295v1 [physics.atm-clus].[252] F. Robichaux, Phys. Rev. A 60 (1999) 1706.[253] I. Mazumdar, Few-Body Syst. 45 (2009) 141.[254] D.V. Fedorov, A.S. Jensen, Phys. Rev. Lett. 25 (1993) 4103.[255] D.V. Fedorov, E. Garrido, A.S. Jensen, Phys. Rev. C 51 (1995) 3052.[256] O.I. Kartavtsev, A.V. Malykh, Few-Body Syst. 44 (2008) 229.[257] J.-M. Richard, S. Fleck, Phys. Rev. Lett. 73 (1994) 1464.[258] A.H. Wapstra, G. Audi, C. Thibault, Nuclear Phys. A 729 (2003) 337.[259] T. Frederico, M.T. Yamashita, A. Delfino, L. Tomio, Few-Body Syst. 38 (2006) 57.[260] F.M. Marqués, et al., Phys. Lett. B 476 (2000) 219.[261] F.M. Marqués, et al., Phys. Rev. C 64 (2001) 061301.[262] F. Ajzenberg-Selove, Nuclear Phys. A 490 (1988) 1.[263] K.H. Wilcox, et al., Phys. Lett. B 59 (1975) 142.[264] M. Zinser, et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 75 (1995) 1719.[265] M. Zinser, et al., Nuclear Phys. A 619 (1997) 151.[266] F. Barranco, P.F. Bortignon, R.A. Broglia, G. Colo, E. Vigezzi, Eur. Phys. J. A 11 (2001) 385.[267] M. Thoennessen, et al., Phys. Rev. C 59 (1999) 111.[268] M. Thoennessen, S. Yokoyama, P.G. Hansen, Phys. Rev. C 63 (2001) 014308.[269] T. Nakamura, et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 83 (1999) 1112.[270] G. Audi, A.H. Wapstra, Nuclear Phys. A 595 (1995) 409.[271] I. Tanihata, J. Phys. G 22 (1996) 157.[272] R. Neugart, et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 101 (2008) 132502.[273] A. Ozawa, et al., Nuclear Phys. A 691 (2001) 599.[274] H.T. Fortune, R. Sherr, Phys. Rev. C 85 (2012) 027303.[275] N. Kobayashi, et al. 2011. arXiv:1111.7196v1 [nucl-ex].[276] M. Petrascu, et al., Nuclear Phys. A 738 (2004) 503.[277] C.C. Hall, et al., Phys. Rev. C 81 (2010) 021302(R).[278] R.D. Amado, F.C. Greenwood, Phys. Rev. D 7 (1973) 2517.[279] R. Perne, H. Kröger, Phys. Rev. C 20 (1979) 340.[280] H. Kröger, R. Perne, Phys. Rev. C 22 (1980) 21.[281] H.W.L. Naus, J.A. Tjon, Few-Body Syst. 2 (1987) 121.[282] G. Karner, Few-Body Syst. 3 (1987) 7.[283] T. Sogo, O. Sørensen, A.S. Jensen, D.V. Fedorov, J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys. 38 (2005) 1051.[284] D.V. Fedorov, A.S. Jensen, M. Thøgersen, Few-Body Syst. 43 (2008) 69.

VOLUME 83, NUMBER 6 P HY S I CA L REV I EW LE T T ER S 9 AUGUST 1999

Coulomb Dissociation of 19C and its Halo Structure

T. Nakamura,1,* N. Fukuda,1 T. Kobayashi,2 N. Aoi,1 H. Iwasaki,1 T. Kubo,3 A. Mengoni,3,† M. Notani,3H. Otsu,2 H. Sakurai,3 S. Shimoura,4 T. Teranishi,3 Y.X. Watanabe,1 K. Yoneda,1 and M. Ishihara1,3

1Department of Physics, University of Tokyo, 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo, Tokyo 113-0033, Japan2Department of Physics, Tohoku University, 2-1 Aoba, Aramaki, Aoba, Sendai 980-8578, Japan

3The Institute of Physical and Chemical Research (RIKEN), 2-1 Hirosawa, Wako, Saitama 351-0198, Japan4Department of Physics, Rikkyo University, 3-34-1 Nishi-Ikebukuro, Toshima, Tokyo 171-8501, Japan

(Received 25 February 1999)The extremely neutron-rich nucleus 19C has been studied by Coulomb dissociation into 18C 1 n at

67 A MeV. A large E1 strength of 0.71 6 0.07 e2 fm2 has been observed at low excitation energies.An analysis of the angular distribution of 18C 1 n center of mass has led to a determination of theneutron separation energy of 19C to be 530 6 130 keV. The E1 strength distribution can be wellreproduced for a 19C ground state structure with a dominant s-wave valence neutron, providing aconsistent picture of the neutron halo structure of 19C.

PACS numbers: 25.60.Gc, 21.10.Gv, 25.70.De, 27.20.+n

Halo nuclei have been found in the light and extremelyneutron-rich region of the nuclear chart, and have a noveltwofold structure composed of a core with normal nucleardensity and a halo with diffuse valence neutron(s) [1,2].The formation of a neutron halo is ascribed basically tothe tunneling of the loosely bound valence neutron(s)through the potential well. One unique feature of halonuclei is a greatly enhanced E1 strength at low excitationenergies, as revealed in the Coulomb dissociation of 11Be[3,4] and 11Li [5–8].Coulomb dissociation has been a useful spectroscopic

tool for investigating halo structure [1,2]. Coulomb dis-sociation is a process in which a projectile passes a high-Z target, is excited by absorption of a virtual photonfrom the changing target Coulomb field, and decays intoa breakup channel involving a few particles. The dissoci-ation cross section is related to the electromagnetic tran-sition matrix element B!El" which contains informationon the structure of the projectile ground state [9,10]. Forhalo nuclei, the B!E1" distribution is simply described asa Fourier transform of rR!r", with r being a distance be-tween the core and halo and R!r" the radial componentof the wave function of the halo neutron [11]. The highvalue of jR!r"j2 at large r in a halo nucleus thus leadsto the large E1 strength at low excitation energies. TheB!E1" distribution can thus be used to determine the wavefunction of the halo neutron [3,12].In this work we have studied the ground state structure

of 19C by means of Coulomb dissociation. This nucleushas been considered as a promising candidate for a halonucleus because of the small neutron binding of its groundstate. In fact, the adopted one-neutron separation energySn is only 160 6 110 keV [13]. This value is evensmaller than that of 11Be (Sn ! 504 6 6 keV), which isthe only nucleus where a one-neutron halo structure iswell established. Another important factor to dictate thehalo property is the orbital angular momentum carried bythe outmost valence neutron. According to the standard

shell model, the valence neutron of 19C is expected tooccupy either an s or d orbital [14–16]. However,the formation of the halo depends strongly on whichof these orbitals is occupied by the neutron. Becauseof the absence of a centrifugal barrier the halo canfavorably develop for an s-wave neutron while it willbe considerably suppressed by the barrier for a d-waveneutron. Thus the spin-parity of the state as well as theconfiguration of the wave function is essential for themanifestation of the halo phenomena.The structure of 19C has so far been investigated by

inclusive measurements of either 18C [14,15,17] or theneutron [18] momentum components following the 19Cbreakup. The momentum distribution of 18C at 77 A MeV[14,15] exhibited a narrow width of 42 6 4 MeV#c, whilethat measured at 914 A MeV [17] had a broader widthof 69 6 3 MeV#c. The discrepancy between these mea-surements has not yet been clearly understood, leavingopen the question of the ground state structure itself. Forexample, Ref. [14] argued for a Jp ! 1#21 assignmentfor the 19C ground state, and indicated halo formationarising from a large component of the 18C!01" ! 2s1#2configuration. However, the revised analysis [15] sug-gested the Jp ! 5#21 assignment with a large portionof a 18C!21" ! 2s1#2 configuration. The halo formationshould be strongly suppressed for this configuration be-cause of the effective increase of Sn by 1.62 MeV corre-sponding to the cost for the core excitation energy of the18C!21" state. Summing up, the nature of the 19C halostructure still remains unclear. The difficulty in resolv-ing the problem may primarily be attributed to the missingassignment of the spin-parity and also to the possible un-certainty in the mass measurements which yielded the Snvalues ranging from 700 keV to nearly 0 keV [13].In the present Letter we report on the results of a

kinematically complete measurement of Coulomb dis-sociation of 19C at 67 A MeV. Such a measurementhas been proven to be powerful to explore ground state

1112 0031-9007#99#83(6)#1112(4)$15.00 © 1999 The American Physical Society

Sn[19C ] =

Pole in s-wave kcot(δ) for n-d system ! Well known ~ 50 years Delves’ 60, Van oers & Seagrave’ 67, Girard & Fuda’ 78

n-19C scattering and Efimov physics

Universal property!

The existence of the triton virtual state was found on the basis of the effective range expansion.

What to expect for s-wave scattering? Look at doublet neutron-deuteron scattering…

200keV

850keV

n-19C scattering and Efimov physics

n-19C scattering and Efimov physics

20C has an excited bound Efimov state

20C has a virtual Efimov state

22C = n - n - 20C

= 3 fm

=

22C = n - n - 20C

21C virtual state energy 0, -100 KeV. Enn=-143KeV

=

Acharya, Ji, Phillips PLB723(2013)19 [S2n

< 100 keV] (EFT)

Yamashita, M de Carvalho, TF, Tomio, PLB697(2011)90; A&E PLB715(2012)282

H.T. Fortune, R. Sherr, Phys. Rev. C 85 (2012) 027303.

Horiuchi and Y. Suzuki, Phys. Rev. C 74, 034311 (2006)

S2n < ~ 30 keV

21C Mosby et al. NPA 909, 69 (2013) – MSU - |as | < 2.8 fm ( 21C virtual state)

22C = n - n - 20C

22C = n - n - 20C

21C with a virtual state with energy 1 MeV à It is not possible an excited Efimov state/continuum resonance

22C

Limit cycle: one-body momentum densities n+n+A (A=20)

CM

qc

qn

A

n n

Halo-neutron momentum distribution in 22C

If Ltotal is nonzero ?

•  Virtual p-wave states of light non Borromean nn halo nuclei Evirtual~1.7 Enc

(Delfino et al PRC61, 051301 (2000))

•  Soft dipole mode:

•  M. Cubero et al, PRL 109, 262701 (2012) - 11Li+208Pb close the Coulomb barrier à Eres=690 keV width=0.32 keV

•  Fernandez-Garcıa et al PRL 110, 142701 (2013) - 11Li+208Pb breakup around the Coulomb barrier

•  Ershov, Vaagen, Zhukov, PRC 86 (2012) 034331 – 22C

Determined by scattering lenghts only!

Zero-range model n-n-c system: threshold conditions for excited states and resonances borromean configuration: Efimov stateà resonance at least one subsystem is bound: Efimov stateà virtual state

Weakly bound & large systems: few scales regime in halo nuclei, molecules, trapped atoms CORRELATIONS BETWEEN OBSERVABLESà CONSTRAINTS!

Summary

20C Efimov stateà virtual state E19C > 165 keV

22C large nn halo S2n ~ 30 keV with 21C virtual state 1 MeV (from |as|<2.8 fm)à

No Efimov continuum resonance/excited state (range corrections?)

Few-examples: 11Li, 14Be, 20C, 22C

12Li = 10Li+n+n+n , 21C = 18C+n+n+n

Exploration of universality in scattering, breakup of halo nuclei & CDCC ...

Neutron halo > 2n (no need of a 4-body scale)...

Pigmy resonances Ltotal=1,2, 3 ...

Outlook

Fix the tail of ab-initio calculations...

Collaborators: Antonio Delfino (UFF/Brazil) Filipe Bellotti (PhD/ITA/Aarhus) Mohammadreza Hadizadeh (Ohio Univ) Lauro Tomio (IFT/Brazil) Marcelo Yamashita (IFT/Brazil)