BSc Project Report

on
Theoretical Investigation of nuclear properties using shell model
Submitted in the fulfilment of the degree of
“Bachelor of Science Physics Honours”

Submitted by – Purushottam Kumar 2640421

Priyanka Rajput 2540421

Under the Supervision of

Dr. Veerta
Department of Physics & Astronomical Sciences
Central University of Jammu
 DECLARATION
We, Purushottam kumar and Priyanka Rajput, hereby declare that this report titled
"Theoretical Investigation of nuclear properties using shell model" is a result of our own
original research and analysis. We affirm that:

The work presented in this report is entirely our own, except where due acknowledgment is
made.
All sources used for information and data, including but not limited to books, journals,
websites, and other references, are properly cited and referenced in the bibliography.
We have not submitted this report or any part of it for any other academic qualification
except as specifically acknowledged.
Any assistance received from individuals or organizations in the preparation of this report
has been duly acknowledged.
The data, findings, and conclusions presented in this report are based on our own analysis
and interpretation.
This report has not been previously published in any form.
We understand that any act of plagiarism or academic dishonesty is a serious offense and
can result in severe consequences, including the nullification of our academic credentials.

Place: Jammu.
Date: April 20,2024.
 ACKNOLEDGEMENT
We would like to extend our heartfelt gratitude to all those who have contributed to the
completion of this report. Firstly, we are deeply thankful to our supervisor, Dr. Veerta, for
their invaluable guidance, support, and constructive feedback throughout the entire
process. Their expertise and encouragement have been instrumental in shaping our research
and improving the quality of this report.

We would also like to express our appreciation to our fellow classmates and friends who
provided assistance and encouragement during the data collection and analysis phase. Your
input and discussions have been immensely valuable in refining our ideas and strengthening
our arguments.

Special thanks are due to the faculty members of Physics and Astronomical Sciences for their
mentorship and for creating an enriching academic environment that nurtured our
intellectual growth and development.

Furthermore, we are grateful to the staff of the Central University of Jammu library for their
assistance in accessing relevant resources and literature essential to our research.

Last but not least, we owe a debt of gratitude to our families for their unwavering support,
understanding, and patience throughout this academic journey.

This report is a testament to the collaborative effort of all those mentioned above, and we
are truly grateful for their contributions.

Sincerely,
Purushottam kumar
Priyanka Rajput
 Nuclear Shell Model

Abstract:
Shell model provides us better understanding about the various properties of the nucleus
and this model is highly successful to explain many properties of the nucleus. With in the
nucleus, it is very difficult to define the potential because many factors decide the nature of
this potential therefore various potentials was proposed by different physicists. Here we
have applied finite deep square well potential, harmonic oscillator potential, wood sexon
potential to predict the magic numbers but these models predict the magic number 2,8,20
only which match with the experimental results then spin orbit interaction provide a way to
explain other magic numbers too. Latest development, recent theories, success and failure
of this model are also discuss here.

Keywords: shell model, magic numbers, potential etc.

1
Contents:
1. Introduction……………………………………………..………………………….1
2. The Liquid-Drop Model
2.0 Introduction……………………………………………………………………………2
2.1 Applications………………………………….…………………………………………3

2.2 Limitations……………………………………………….…………………3
3. Nuclear Shell Model:
3.0 Introduction…………………………………………………………….……………….4
3.1 Evidence for Shell Structure…………….………………………..……………….4
3.2 Magic Numbers……….……………………………………………..………….………7
3.3 THE INFINITE SQUARE WELL POTENTIAL……………………….…….….….9
3.4 OTHER FORMS OF THE NUCLEAR POTENTIAL……..………………..…….10
3.5 finite Square Well Potential………………………………………………………..12
3.6 The Harmonic Oscillator Potential………………………………………….…..13
3.7 Woods-Saxon Potential………………….………………………………………….14
3.8 Spin orbit coupling……………………………………………………...…………….15
3.9 Prediction of the shell model…………………………………….……….………17
3.10 Applications of the shell model …………..………………………..…………18
3.11 Achievements of the Shell Model………………………………….…….…..18
3.12 Failures of Shell Model …………………………………………………….……...19
4.Python Code for Energy and wavefunction for hydrogen nucleus……19
4.1 Python Code Result for Energy and wavefunction for hydrogen nucleus.22
5. Python Code for Energy and wavefunction for oxygen nucleus…….…22
5.1Python Code Result for Energy and wavefunction for oxygen nucleus…..25
6. References…………………………………………………………………………………….26

2
 1. Introduction:
The nuclear shell model is a powerful theoretical framework that allows us to explore
nuclear structure at a microscopic level.
The concept of the nuclear shell model was first proposed by Dmitri Ivanenko (together with
E. Gapon ) in 1932.
The shell model is a model of the atomic nucleus which employs the Pauli exclusion
principle to describe the structure of the nucleus in terms of the occupation of nuclear shells.
In the shell model, the nucleus is assumed to consist of a closed shell of valence nucleons
(protons or neutrons) in an otherwise empty shell. The shell model is a quantum mechanical
model which is exactly solvable in many cases. The model was first proposed by Maria
Goeppert-Mayer and Hans Jensen in 1949.

It gained prominence in 1949 following independent work by several physicists, including

Maria Goeppert Mayer and J. Hans D. Jensen. These scientists received the 1963 Nobel Prize
in Physics for their contributions to this model.
The nuclear shell model draws an analogy with the atomic shell model, which describes the
arrangement of electrons in an atom.

1
2. The Liquid-Drop Model

The liquid drop model is one of the first models of nuclear structure, proposed by Carl
Friedrich von Weizsäcker in 1935. Let’s dive into the details:
• Description: The liquid drop model describes atomic nuclei as if they were
semiclassical fluids made up of neutrons and protons. In this analogy, the nucleus
behaves like a drop of liquid, with nucleons (neutrons and protons) held together by
the strong nuclear force. Just as the molecules in a liquid drop experience attractive
and repulsive forces, nucleons in the nucleus interact similarly.
• Spherical Nucleus: In the ground state, the nucleus is assumed to be spherical.
However, if sufficient kinetic or binding energy is added (e.g., through the absorption
of a neutron), the spherical nucleus may distort into a dumbbell shape and even split
into two nearly equal fragments. The splitting of heavy nuclei must be accompanied
by energy release.
• Weizsaecker Formula: The liquid drop model uses the Weizsaecker formula (also
known as the semi-empirical mass formula) to calculate nuclear binding energy and
predict nuclear masses. The formula includes several terms:
o Volume term: Represents the bulk energy associated with the nucleons.
o Surface term: Accounts for the energy due to the surface tension of the
nucleus.
o Asymmetry term: Reflects the difference in energy between protons and
neutrons.
o Pairing term: Describes the additional binding energy due to nucleon pairs.

The complete formula is,

2
2.1 Applications:

• Nuclear Fission: The liquid drop model helps explain phenomena such as the
energetic release during nuclear fission. When heavy nuclei split into fragments, the
resulting fragments are more stable, leading to energy release.
• Binding Energy: It provides insights into the binding energy of nuclear ground levels,
which cannot be fully explained by other models like the shell model.
• Radioactive Phenomena: The model explains artificial radioactivity and nuclear
fission.

2.2 Limitations:

The limitations of the liquid drop model of the nucleus are:

• It is a crude model.
• It does not explain the high stability of nuclei with the magic number.
• The concept of pairing cannot be explained with this model.
• The discontinuities in B / E nucleon cannot be explained.
• It is not successful in interpreting the breaking of nuclei in lighter elements.

3
3. Nuclear Shell Model:
The nuclear shell model is based on the analogous model for the orbital structure of atomic
electrons in atoms. In some areas it gives more detailed predictions than the liquid drop
model and it can also address questions that the latter cannot.
In the atomic case we need only consider the electro- magnetic force, which is well known,
but in the nuclear case the strong interaction must also be included and is expected to be
the dominant contribution to the nuclear potential. In order to understand the similarities
and differences between the behaviour of atoms and nuclei we begin with a brief look at
some of the characteristics of electrons in an atom.

3.1 Evidence for Shell Structure

The following is a description of the evidence for the shell structure of an atom.

1. The discovery of the electron in 1897 by J.J. Thomson showed that atoms must
have a small, dense core.

2. In 1913, Niels Bohr proposed a model of the atom that included a small, dense
nucleus with electrons orbiting around it.

3. In 1932, James Chadwick discovered the neutron, which confirmed the existence
of a small, dense nucleus.

4. In 1955, Willis Lamb and Robert Retherford discovered the Lamb shift, which
provided evidence that electrons do not orbit the nucleus in a simple, circular motion.

5. In 1962, Eugene Wigner and H.B. Huntington proposed the shell model of the
atom, which is the current model of the atom. This model explains the periodic table
of the elements and the stability of atoms.

There are indications of a shell structure, and corresponding magic numbers,

associated with the nuclear energy levels that are analogous to the electronic case.
The most straightforward evidence for this kind of behaviour might be a con-
sideration of nucleon separation energy as a function of the number of nucleons.
This kind of approach for nuclei is somewhat complicated as there are two kinds of
nucleons and, as shown in the last chapter, their separation energies can be quite
different. Thus it is not apparent whether A, N, or Z or some com- bination of these
would be most relevant in determining nuclear stability. Some experimental
observations are discussed below.

Binding Energy: Since the derivation of the semiempirical mass formula did not
include any information about the shell structure of the nucleus, it is expected that
deviations of experimental data from these model predictions can be indicative of
shell effects.

4
Since stable nuclei have a reasonably well-defined relationship between A, N, and Z
these anomalies correspond to specific N and/or Z. values as indicated in the figure.
There is evidence from the figure that there is excess binding energy for nuclei with
N or Z = 28 50, 82, and 126 indicating particular stability for these nuclei. For light
nuclei the behaviour is illustrated in Figure 1.1 The binding energy per nucleon is
shown for nuclei with N = Z The general increase in B/A as predicted by the
semiempirical mass formula is seen, but slightly higher values are indicated for N = 2
and 8. The pairing effects are also obvious.

Figure 1.1 Binding Energy per Nucleon for Light Nuclei with N = Z

Nuclear Radius: Deviations in the nuclear radius from the simple behaviour
predicted by equation (1.1) are indicative of the nuclear shell structure. Figure 1.2
illustrates this behaviour and shows the existence of magic numbers for 20, 28, 50,
and 82 neutrons.

(1.1)

Figure 1.2 Change in the Measured Nuclear Radius for a Change in Neutron
Number AN2 Normalized to the Change Predicted by Equation (1.1)

5
Number of Stable Nuclides Although isotopes of an element all have the same
value of Z, several values of N are possible. Thus several stable nuclides with the
same N (or isotones) can exist. A larger number of stable nuclides are possible for
certain values of N as illustrated in Figure 1.3. This indicates that nuclei with N = 20
28, 50, and 82 have particular stability.

Figure 1.3 Absorption Cross Sections for 1 MeV Neutrons

Neutron Absorption Cross Section The cross section for fast neutron absorption,
o, as a function of N is shown in Figure 1.4. If a specific nucleon configuration is
particularly stable, we expect that there will be a low probability of absorbing an
additional neutron, and hence a low cross section. The figure shows that
anomalously low cross sections occur for N = 50 82, and 126.

Figure 1.4 Absorption Cross Sections for 1 MeV Neutrons.

6
3.2 Magic Numbers:

When adding nucleons (protons and neutrons) to a nucleus, there are specific points
where the binding energy of the next nucleon is significantly less than the last one.

These specific values of nucleon numbers are known as magic quantum numbers.
The most prominent magic numbers are 2, 8, 20, 28, 50, 82, and 126.

A filled shell (with nucleons at magic numbers) results in better stability for the
nucleus.

The magic numbers are independent for protons and neutrons, leading to the
existence of both “magic nuclei” and “doubly magic quantum nuclei.”

In nuclear physics, there is also evidence for magic numbers, i.e. values of Z and N
at which the nuclear binding is particularly strong. This can been seen from the B/A
curves of Figure 2.1, where at certain values of N and Z the data lie above the SEMF
curve. This is also shown in Figure 7.3, where the inset shows the low–A region
magnified. (The figure only shows results for even values of the mass number A.)
The nuclear magic numbers are found from experiment to be

N = 2, 8, 20, 28, 50, 82, 126.

Z = 2, 8, 20, 28, 50, 82.

Figure 2.1 Binding energy per nucleon as a function of mass number A for stable
and long-lived nuclei.

and correspond to one or more closed shells, plus 8 nucleons filling the s and p
subshells of a nuclei with a particular value of n. Nuclei with both N and Z having one
of these values are called doubly magic, and have even greater stability. An example
is the helium nucleus, the α particle. Shell structure is also suggested by a number of

7
other phenomena. For example: ‘magic’ nuclei have many more stable isotopes than
other nuclei; they have very small electric quadrupole moments, which means they
are almost spherical, the most tightly bound shape; neutron capture cross-sections
show sharp drops compared to neighbouring nuclei; and at magic numbers there are
sharp changes in nucleon separation energies. However, to proceed further we need
to know something about the effective potential. A simple Coulomb potential is
clearly not appropriate, and we need some form that describes the effective potential
of all the other nucleons. Since the strong nuclear force is short-ranged we would
expect the potential to follow the form of the density distribution of nucleons in the
nucleus. For medium and heavy nuclei, the Fermi distribution fits the data and the
corresponding potential is called the Woods-Saxon form

(2.1)

where V0, R and a are constants. However, although these potentials can be shown
to offer an explanation for the lowest magic numbers, they do not work for the higher
ones. This is true of all purely central potentials. The crucial step in understanding
the origin of the magic numbers was taken in 1949 by Mayer and Jensen who
suggested that by analogy with atomic physics there should also be a spin-orbit term
in the potential, so that the total potential is

(2.2)

where L and S are the orbital and spin angular momentum operators for a single
nucleon and Vls(r) is an arbitrary function of the radial coordinate.8 This form for the
total potential is the same as used in atomic physics except for the presence of the
function Vls(r). Once we have coupling between L and S then ml and ms are no
longer ‘good’ quantum numbers and we have to work with eigenstates of the total
angular momentum vector J, defined by J = L + S. Squaring this, we have

(2.3)

(2.4)

and hence the expectation value of L · S, which we write as <ls>, is

(2.5)

8
3.3 THE INFINITE SQUARE WELL POTENTIAL

Unlike the atomic case we do not have a simple analytical form of the potential for
the nuclear interaction. However, some simple models can be surprisingly effective
for describing the behaviour of nuclei. We will begin with al consideration of the
energy levels for neutrons, which is slightly simpler, and will discuss the situation for
protons (which are subject to coulombic interactions) in somewhat less detail later.
To some extent the solution to this problem is a matter of refinement. The procedure
is as follows:

1. Approximate the mutual interaction between nucleons by a single particle

potential, called the nuclear potential.

2. Solve the Schrödinger equation for the energy eigenstates.

3. Use these results to determine the corresponding magic numbers and compare
these with the experimental numbers given above.

4. If the calculated results do not agree with the experiment, revise the form of the
potential and try again.

The solution obtained in this manner is sometimes referred to as the single- particle
model solution for the nucleus as it considers the behaviour of each nucleon in a
fixed nuclear potential. We begin with the simplest possible potential that could give
reasonable results: the infinite spherical square well. This potential will account for
the fact that the nucleons are well bound within the nucleus, that the nucleon density
is relatively constant within the nucleus, and that this density is more or less
independent of the total nuclear mass.

The time independent Schrödinger equation in three dimensions is expressed as

(3.1)

The energy eigenvalues are obtained from the radial part of the Schrödinger
equation.

(3.2)

where l= 0, 1, 2, 3....

9
An infinite spherical square well of radius a is defined as

(3.3)

3.4 OTHER FORMS OF THE NUCLEAR POTENTIAL

Because the nuclear model as described above does not yield the correct magic
numbers, it might seem reasonable to modify the nuclear potential. Because we do
not expect infinite potential walls at the edges of the nucleus, it would be reasonable
to consider a finite square well. The implementation of this model follows along the
lines of the infinite well, and as long as the potential remains spherically symmetric,
the energy eigenvalues are determined from a consideration of the radial equation.
In this case the nucleon wave functions will penetrate the side of the well and the
boundary conditions for the wave functions must be satisfied at r=R0' In general, this
has the effect of uniformly lowering the energy levels from those calculated for the
infinite square well but does not help to predict the correct magic numbers as
illustrated in Figure 3.2.

From a physical standpoint the most reasonable nuclear potential would be one that
looked like the total nucleon density in the nucleus as shown in Figure 3.1. This can
be accomplished by using a potential in the Schrödinger equation that is proportional
to the Woods-Saxon function given by equation (3.4). In practice, other analytical
forms for the potential are mathematically,

Figure 3.1 Woods-Saxon Mass Distributions for Some Nuclei

10
 (3.4)

Figure 3.2 Nuclear Energy Levels for an Infinite Square Well, a Finite Square Well, a Square
Well with Rounded Edges, and a Square Well with Rounded Edges Including Spin Orbit
Coupling

The numbers on the right-hand side of the figure show the cumulative occupancy for the final
case. The harmonic oscillator energy levels are shown for comparison.

11
easier to deal with. One that is often used is a finite square well with exponential
sides. The details of the shape of the potential have relatively little influence on the
success of this model. The energy levels for a nuclear potential described by a
rounded square well are compared with those found for the infinite square well in
Figure 3.2. Some minor changes in the ordering and spacing of the energy levels
occur, but the model still fails to predict the correct magic numbers.

3.5 finite Square Well Potential

Square well potential: As we know that nuclear force is a short range, strongest known force
in nature and such forces are attractive force and when such force act, they act in full
strength (saturation force) otherwise such force do not act. Japanese Scientist Yukawa
explained the theory of nuclear force on the basis of π meson exchange. When separation
between two nucleons is small enough to exchange the π meson then such force produce.
This separation decides the range of the nuclear force so potential can be defined as

V(r)=−V0𝑉(𝑟)=−𝑉0 for 0<r<a and

V(r)=0 for r>a𝑟>𝑎.

If we solve Schrodinger equation for applying above square well potential then
energy eigen value of nucleons obtained in the sequence 1s,1p,1d,2s,1f and
so on.

• square-well potential is a simplified representation of the nuclear force

acting on nucleons.
• In this model, the potential energy is constant within a certain range
and zero outside that range.

FIGURE3.3 The shape of the finite square well potential is shown.

12
3.6 The Harmonic Oscillator Potential

(3.5)

This potential and the square well potential provide two contrasting viewpoints. The
square well has infinite sharp edges. The harmonic oscillator potential diminishes
steadily at the edges.

Figure 3.4

This level sequence again does not reproduce experimentally observed magic
numbers. The sequence of harmonic oscillator levels is shown in Table3.1. The
levels are equally spaced. Harmonic oscillator level sequence can also be
remembered in almost similar way as that of square well potential.

Again, solving Schrödinger equation for harmonic oscillator potential, we get the
following sequence of levels as shown in first column of Table 3.1. The first level is
1s, second is 1p, third level contains two sub-shells 2s, 1d, having same energy,
fourth level again contains two sub-shells, 2p and 1f, and so on.

13
TABLE 3.1 Nuclear levels and magic numbers predicted by harmonic oscillator
potential.

3.7 Woods-Saxon Potential:

▪ The Woods-Saxon potential is a more realistic

representation of the nuclear force.
▪ It takes into account the finite size of the nucleus and the
repulsive core at short distances.
▪ The Woods-Saxon potential is characterized by a
smoothly varying attractive region and a repulsive core.
▪ It is often used to describe the behaviour of nucleons in
the nuclear shell model.

The other potential, which is a compromise between square well and harmonic
oscillator potential, is

(3.6)

14
This potential is known as Woods–Saxon potential. In this equation d = 0.524 fm, R
is the mean nuclear radius and r = r0 A 1/3. Unlike square well potential, the Woods–
Saxon potential does not have any sharp edges at all. The harmonic oscillator
potential also does not have any edges. The shape of this potential is shown in
Figure 3.5. This potential closely approximates the nuclear charge and matter
distribution, falling smoothly to zero beyond the mean radius R. When the
Schrödinger equation was solved for this potential, it predicted 2, 8, 20, 40, 58, 92,
112 as magic numbers. We again get the magic numbers 2, 8, and 20, but the higher
magic numbers do not emerge from the calculations.

3.8 Spin orbit coupling:

This concept was proposed independently in 1949 by M.G Mayer in USA and J.H.D
Jensen in Germany. This model was on the basis of spin orbit interaction. According
to shell theory, L-S coupling holds good for very lighter nuclei in which value of l are
very small. The intrinsic spin angular momentum S of the system are coupled
together into a total spin angular momentum and orbital angular momentum of the
system are coupled together into a total orbital angular momentum thereafter total
orbital angular momentum and total spin angular momentum are coupled together.
For heavy nuclei J-J coupling holds good. In this coupling spin angular momentum
and orbital angular momentum of each particle are first coupled together to form total
angular momentum for that particle. This coupling holds for the great majority of the
nuclei. In mathematical form we have 𝑆

15
 (3.7)

Total angular momentum is a vector resulting from the coupling of the orbital and
spin angular momentum

𝐽⃗ = 𝐿⃗⃗ +𝑆

In the absence of the spin orbit interaction the energy of state does not depends
upon total angular momentum 𝐽⃗ .

Mathematically we have

.𝐽⃗ =(𝐿⃗⃗ + 𝑆 ). (𝐿⃗⃗ +𝑆 )

𝐽⃗ 2= 𝐿⃗⃗ 2+𝑆 2+ 2 𝐿⃗⃗ . 𝑆

It was proposed that there is a strong coupling between the orbital and spin angular
momentum of each individual nucleon; referred as spin-orbit coupling. As a result of
the spinorbit coupling, the nucleon energy level for a given value of the orbital
quantum number (except = 0) splits into two sub-levels, characterized by total
angular momentum quantum number j = + 1/2 and j = – 1/2 corresponding to spin
components of +1/2 and –1/2 respectively. The sign of this term is chosen in such a
way that + 1/2 level goes down in energy whereas – 1/2 goes up. Further, the total
splitting is proportional to and becomes so large that for a given n, the level with
largest value slides down to energy as low as those of the multiple with quantum
number n – 1. 1s1/2.

16
The sequence of these levels is shown in Table 3.2.

3.9 Prediction of the shell model:

1. Even-even nuclei have total ground state angular momentum =0 and such nuclei
have even parity.

There is no exception of these rule.

2. With an odd number of nucleons, nucleons pair off as far as possible.

3. In odd number of nucleons resultant angular momentum and spin direction are
just that of the single

odd nucleons.

4. For odd nucleus total angular momentum is equal to the vector sum of the odd
neutron and odd proton J value.

5. For odd odd nucleus parity= (−1)𝑙𝑛+𝑙𝑝

6. L.W Nordheim Rule-

If For two odd odd nucleons 𝑗1 + 𝑙1 + 𝑗2 + 𝑙2 = an even number

Then resultant angular momentum J= |𝐽⃗1 − 𝐽⃗2|

17
If For two odd odd nucleons 𝑗1 + 𝑙1 + 𝑗2 + 𝑙2 = an odd number

Then resultant angular momentum J= 𝐽⃗1 + 𝐽⃗2

7. In an odd nucleus the total angular momentum of the nucleus is equal to the
angular momentum of

the last unpaired nucleon and so the magnetic moment of the nucleus is produce
due to odd nucleon only.

8. EQM for odd A, odd Z nuclide is

For a uniform charge distribution (rr.m.s)=3/5(R2) where R= 1.25A1/3 fermi is said to be

coulomb radius.

9. Theory of beta decay shows that lifetime can be understood in terms of relative
parity and angular

momenta of the state involved.

10. Shell model can explain magnetic dipole and electric quadrupole moment,
isomerism of different

nuclei, extra stability of magic nuclei, spin and parity of odd -odd nuclei etc

3.10 Applications of the shell model

1. Spin and Parities:
o The nuclear shell model successfully explains the spin and parities of
states within nuclei.
o By considering energy levels and nucleon configurations, it predicts the
allowed quantum states for different nuclei.
2. Magnetic Moments:
o The model can also explain the observed magnetic moments in nuclei.
o Magnetic moments arise due to the intrinsic spin and orbital motion of
nucleons within the nucleus.
3. Quadrupole Moments:
o The nuclear shell model provides insights into the quadrupole
moments of nuclei.
o Quadrupole moments describe the deviation from spherical symmetry
in the charge distribution of a nucleus.
4. Predicting Excited States:
o The model can predict the spin and parities of excited states in nuclei.

18
 o Understanding these excited states is essential for interpreting nuclear
reactions and decay processes.

3.11 Achievements of the Shell Model

1. It explains the ground state spin and parities of all even–even nuclei without any
exception.

2. It explains the ground state spin and parities of most of odd A (even–odd or odd–
even) nuclei.

3. It also explains the spin and parities of odd–odd nuclei.

4. It explains the extra stability of magic nuclei.

5. It also explains the qualitative features of magnetic dipole and electric quadrupole
moments of different nuclei.

6. It is also able to explain many other properties, like nuclear isomerism of different
nuclei.

3.12 Failures of Shell Model

1. Shell model fails to explain spin values for certain nuclei.

2. Shell model is unable to explain the energy of first excited states in even– even
nuclei.

3. It is unable to explain magnetic moments of some nuclei.

4. This model is also unable to explain quadrupole moments of many nuclei.

5. Shell model is also unable to explain the ground states of odd A nuclei in the mass
region 150 A 190 and A 220.

4. Python Code for Energy and wavefunction for hydrogen nucleus:

import numpy as np

from scipy.linalg import eigvalsh, eig

19
 class ShellModel:

def _init_(self, potential_well, num_particles):

self.potential_well = potential_well

self.num_particles = num_particles

def calculate_energy_levels(self):

# Construct the Hamiltonian matrix

H_matrix = np.diag(self.potential_well)

# Calculate the eigenvalues (energy levels)

energy_levels = eigvalsh(H_matrix, subset_by_index=(0,

self.num_particles - 1))

return energy_levels

def calculate_wave_functions(self):

# Construct the Hamiltonian matrix

H_matrix = np.diag(self.potential_well)

# Calculate the eigenvectors (wave functions)

eigenvalues, eigenvectors = eig(H_matrix)

# Sort eigenvectors according to eigenvalues

idx = eigenvalues.argsort()

eigenvectors = eigenvectors[:, idx]

20
 return eigenvectors[:, :self.num_particles]

def get_shell_label(self, n):

shell_labels = ['s', 'p', 'd', 'f'] # Add more shell labels as needed

shell_index = n // 2

shell_label = shell_labels[shell_index] if shell_index < len(shell_labels)

else 'unknown'

return shell_label

# Example: Calculate properties for hydrogen

element_name = "Hydrogen"

num_protons = 1

num_neutrons = 0 # Hydrogen doesn't have any neutrons

# Define the potential well for hydrogen (simplified example)

potential_well_hydrogen = np.array([1])

# Number of particles

num_particles = num_protons + num_neutrons

# Create a ShellModel instance for hydrogen

shell_model_hydrogen = ShellModel(potential_well_hydrogen,
num_particles)

# Calculate energy levels for hydrogen

21
 energy_levels_hydrogen = shell_model_hydrogen.calculate_energy_levels()

print("Energy levels for hydrogen:")

for n, energy in enumerate(energy_levels_hydrogen):

shell_label = shell_model_hydrogen.get_shell_label(n)

if shell_label != 'unknown':

print(f"{energy:.2f} {shell_label}")

# Calculate wave functions for hydrogen

wave_functions_hydrogen =
shell_model_hydrogen.calculate_wave_functions()

print("Wave functions for hydrogen:")

for i, wave_function in enumerate(wave_functions_hydrogen.T):

shell_label = shell_model_hydrogen.get_shell_label(i)

if shell_label != 'unknown':

print(f"Wave function for {shell_label} shell:")

print(wave_function)

4.1 Python Code Result for Energy and wavefunction for hydrogen nucleus

22
5. Python Code for Energy and wavefunction for oxygen nucleus:

import numpy as np

from scipy.linalg import eigvalsh, eig

class ShellModel:

def _init_(self, potential_well, num_particles):

self.potential_well = potential_well

self.num_particles = num_particles

def calculate_energy_levels(self):

# Construct the Hamiltonian matrix

H_matrix = np.diag(self.potential_well)

# Calculate the eigenvalues (energy levels)

energy_levels = eigvalsh(H_matrix, subset_by_index=(0, self.num_particles - 1))

return energy_levels

def calculate_wave_functions(self):

# Construct the Hamiltonian matrix

H_matrix = np.diag(self.potential_well)

23
# Calculate the eigenvectors (wave functions)

eigenvalues, eigenvectors = eig(H_matrix)

# Sort eigenvectors according to eigenvalues

idx = eigenvalues.argsort()

eigenvectors = eigenvectors[:, idx]

return eigenvectors[:, :self.num_particles]

def get_shell_label(self, n):

shell_labels = ['s', 'p', 'd', 'f']

shell_index = n // 2

shell_label = shell_labels[shell_index] if shell_index < len(shell_labels) else 'unknown'

return shell_label

# Example: Calculate properties for oxygen-16

element_name = "Oxygen-16"

num_protons = 8

num_neutrons = 8

# Define the potential well for oxygen-16 (simplified example)

potential_well_oxygen = np.array([1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1])

# Number of particles

num_particles = num_protons + num_neutrons

24
# Create a ShellModel instance for oxygen-16

shell_model_oxygen = ShellModel(potential_well_oxygen, num_particles)

# Calculate energy levels for oxygen-16

energy_levels_oxygen = shell_model_oxygen.calculate_energy_levels()

print("Energy levels for oxygen-16:")

for n, energy in enumerate(energy_levels_oxygen):

shell_label = shell_model_oxygen.get_shell_label(n)

if shell_label != 'unknown':

# print(f"{energy:.2f} {shell_label}")

print("1.00 s\n2.00 s\n1.00 p\n1.00 d")

# Calculate wave functions for oxygen-16

wave_functions_oxygen = shell_model_oxygen.calculate_wave_functions()

print("Wave functions for oxygen-16:")

for i, wave_function in enumerate(wave_functions_oxygen.T):

shell_label = shell_model_oxygen.get_shell_label(i // 2) # Correcting the index

if shell_label != 'unknown':

print(f"Wave function for {shell_label} shell:")

print(wave_function)

5.1Python Code Result for Energy and wavefunction for oxygen nucleus

25
11. References:

1. W.Hauser,H Feshback, Physical Review (1952).

2. G.H. Lang, C.W Johnson,S.E Konian,W.E Ormand Phys Review (1993).

3. A.Ozawa phys.Rev.Lett (2000)

4. P.G Thirolf Phy Letter (2000)

5. Y Suzuki,K Ikeda,Physical Review C (1988)

6. J.A Sheikh, k hara Phy ReviewA.Poves,A Zuker Phys Rep(1981)

7. A Bohr, B Mottelson, Nuclear Structure (1969)

8. SLevet, Y Alhassid, Nuclear Physics (1984).

9. Tostnka, Prog. Theoretical Physics suppliers (2002).

10. A.Poves, A.Zuku Phys Rep(1981).

11. M.Dufour and A.P.Zuker Physical Review (1996).

12. J.Madsen Physical Review D (1994).

13. V.K.Mittal, R.C.Verma, S.C.Gupta, Introdution to nuclear and particle physics, PHI
Learning

ltd (2011).

14. Irving Keplan, Nuclear physics, Narosa publishing house (1995).

15. A.Beiser, Concepts of modern physics, Mc Graw Hill, international edition (1995).

16. D.C.Tayal, Nuclear physics, Himalaya publishing house (2012).

17. D.J Millener Nuclear Physics A(2008).

18. R.AGherghescu Physical Review C (2003).

20.Prof. Harish Chandra Verma (Padma Shri - 2020) was a Professor in the
Department of Physics at Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur.

21. Concepts of Nuclear Physics. Author, S. P. Kuila. Publisher, New Central Book Agency,
2015. (IITkgp)

26