Donald A. Landman, L. A. Levin, and Allen Lurio, "Calculation of the Hyperfine Structure and gJ Values of the 3d94s4p Configuration of Copper," J. Opt. Soc. Am. 59, 962-968 (1969)
Wave functions that take into account departures from LS coupling and configuration interaction are obtained for the 3d94s4p configuration of copper by treating the radial integrals as parameters and adjusting them to fit the experimental energy levels. The relativistic dipole and quadrupole hfs matrix elements between all levels of the same J within the 3d94s4p configuration are derived. The hfs and gJ values of most states of the 3d94s4p configuration are then obtained by evaluating these matrix elements with the derived wave functions. Good agreement between calculated and most experimental hfs and gJ measurements is obtained. The quadrupole moment of 63Cu obtained from the d hole is −0.267b and from the p electron is −0.184b. Sternheimer corrections are not included.
You do not have subscription access to this journal. Cited by links are available to subscribers only. You may subscribe either as an Optica member, or as an authorized user of your institution.
You do not have subscription access to this journal. Article tables are available to subscribers only. You may subscribe either as an Optica member, or as an authorized user of your institution.
You do not have subscription access to this journal. Equations are available to subscribers only. You may subscribe either as an Optica member, or as an authorized user of your institution.
Parameters and relationships which were fixed throughout diagonalization procedure.
Parameter
Value (cm−1)
A
100 000
B
1000
C
4500
H
85
α
80
F2
F2′+130
G1
G1′+40
G3
G3′+30
Gds
Gds′
J
J′
K
K′+1000
ζd
ζd′
ζp
2ζp′−ζp″
Table III
Values of least-square-optimized parameters.
Parameter
Value (cm−1)
A′
51 353±70
A″
32 667±115
F2′
318±4
G1′
241±9
G3′
47±4
Gsp′
8085±61
Gds′
1104±57
J′
1439±100
K′
3611±78
ζd′
833±15
ζp′
326±40
ζp″
194±60
Table IV
Comparison of observed and calculated energy levels, in cm−1; Δ = 58 cm−1.
Configuration
Designation
J
obs.
calc.
O–C
3d104p
2P
30535
30539
−4
30784
30779
5
3d94s4p
4P(3P)
40944
40959
−15
40114
40149
−35
39019
39092
−73
4D(3P)
44916
44918
−2
44544
44549
−5
44406
44420
−14
43514
43533
−19
4F(3P)
42302
42282
20
41563
41533
30
41153
41105
48
40909
40825
84
2P(3P)
45821
45853
−32
45879
45833
46
2D(3P)
46173
46167
6
46598
46634
−36
2F(3P)
43726
43717
9
44963
44973
−10
2P(1P)
58365
58272
93
56344
56444
−100
2D(1P)
58691
58719
−28
56651
56619
32
2F(1P)
58119
58133
−14
56030
56018
12
Table V
Calculated composition of the levels of the 3d104p and the 3d94s4p configurations of copper. The squares of the coupling coefficients with the appropriate signs are given.
Conf.
Desig.
J
4P
4D
4F
2P(3P)
2P(1P)
2D(3P)
2D(1P)
2F(3P)
2F(1P)
d10p
d8s2p
3d104p
2P
−0.059
−0.029
0.911
0.001
0.056
0.034
−0.908
0.002
4s4p
4P(3P)
−0.98
−0.01
0.01
0.96
0.01
−0.02
−0.99
−0.01
4D(3P)
−0.02
0.63
−0.32
0.01
−0.02
0.01
−0.66
0.04
0.02
0.26
−0.46
0.14
0.08
0.31
0.88
0.12
4F(3P)
0.02
0.95
−0.02
−0.02
−0.82
0.01
0.15
−0.02
−0.90
0.08
1.00
2P(3P)
0.36
0.59
−0.02
0.03
0.02
−0.03
0.62
−0.03
−0.26
0.03
2D(3P)
−0.27
−0.25
0.01
−0.45
−0.01
−0.01
0.15
0.84
2F(3P)
0.35
0.04
−0.06
0.54
−0.10
0.10
0.80
2P(1P)
−0.02
−0.90
−0.04
0.04
−0.03
−0.82
−0.06
−0.05
0.04
2D(1P)
−0.06
0.85
0.08
−0.79
−0.13
0.08
2F(1P)
−0.12
0.83
0.05
−0.96
0.04
Table VI
Quadrupole matrix elements between states of the same J, L and S. (The complete dipole and quadrupole matrix element table is in IBM Research Report RW 109, available from the IBM Watson Laboratory, 612 West 115 Street, New York, New York 10025.)
(J, J)
BJJ
4F9/2
bp′−bd′
4F7/2
4D7/2
z2F7/2
y2F7/2
4F5/2
4D5/2
4P5/2
z2F5/2
y2F5/2
z2D5/2
y2D5/2
4F3/2
4D3/2
4P3/2
z2D3/2
y2D3/2
z2P3/2
y2P3/2
Table VII
Calculated and observed dipole and quadrupole hfs.
M. Elbel & W. Fischer, Z. Physik 165 151 (1962); A. Blachman, D. A. Landman and A. Lurio, Phys. Rev. 181, 70 (1969.)
S. Wagner, Z. Physik 141 122 (1955).
H. Bucka, J. Ney, and K. P. Wirtnik, Z. Physik 202 22 (1967).
Reference 11.
gJ values in LS coupling, intermediate coupling and comparison with experimental data.10,22
Level
LS coupling
Intermediate coupling
Exp
4F9/2
1.3341
1.3341
1.3340(2)
4F7/2
1.2386
1.2348
1.25
4D7/2
1.4295
1.395
1.45
z2F7/2
1.1432
1.1813
1.21
4F5/2
1.0286
1.0115
1.01
4D5/2
1.3723
1.1506
1.38
4P5/2
1.6014
1.5991
1.600(2)
z2F5/2
0.8568
1.0647
0.92
z2D5/2
1.2005
1.2302
1.20
4F3/2
0.3990
0.4263
0.43
4D3/2
1.2005
1.0722
1.18
4P3/2
1.7350
1.7171
1.714(2)
(1.75)
z2D3/2
0.7995
1.0545
1.00
z2P3/2
1.3341
1.1966
1.28
4D1/2
−0.0023
0.2850
0.10
4P1/2
2.6705
2.6238
2.63
z2P1/2
0.6659
0.4296
0.48
Tables (9)
Table I
Electrostatic radial parameters.
A′ ≡ F0(4s3d)+F0(4s4p)+F0(4p3d)
A″ = F0(4p)
between 3d84s24p and 3d94s4p
between 3d84s24p and 3d94s4p
between 3d94s24p and 3d104p
between 3d84s24p and 3d94s4p
between 3d94s4p and 3d10s4p
Table II
Parameters and relationships which were fixed throughout diagonalization procedure.
Parameter
Value (cm−1)
A
100 000
B
1000
C
4500
H
85
α
80
F2
F2′+130
G1
G1′+40
G3
G3′+30
Gds
Gds′
J
J′
K
K′+1000
ζd
ζd′
ζp
2ζp′−ζp″
Table III
Values of least-square-optimized parameters.
Parameter
Value (cm−1)
A′
51 353±70
A″
32 667±115
F2′
318±4
G1′
241±9
G3′
47±4
Gsp′
8085±61
Gds′
1104±57
J′
1439±100
K′
3611±78
ζd′
833±15
ζp′
326±40
ζp″
194±60
Table IV
Comparison of observed and calculated energy levels, in cm−1; Δ = 58 cm−1.
Configuration
Designation
J
obs.
calc.
O–C
3d104p
2P
30535
30539
−4
30784
30779
5
3d94s4p
4P(3P)
40944
40959
−15
40114
40149
−35
39019
39092
−73
4D(3P)
44916
44918
−2
44544
44549
−5
44406
44420
−14
43514
43533
−19
4F(3P)
42302
42282
20
41563
41533
30
41153
41105
48
40909
40825
84
2P(3P)
45821
45853
−32
45879
45833
46
2D(3P)
46173
46167
6
46598
46634
−36
2F(3P)
43726
43717
9
44963
44973
−10
2P(1P)
58365
58272
93
56344
56444
−100
2D(1P)
58691
58719
−28
56651
56619
32
2F(1P)
58119
58133
−14
56030
56018
12
Table V
Calculated composition of the levels of the 3d104p and the 3d94s4p configurations of copper. The squares of the coupling coefficients with the appropriate signs are given.
Conf.
Desig.
J
4P
4D
4F
2P(3P)
2P(1P)
2D(3P)
2D(1P)
2F(3P)
2F(1P)
d10p
d8s2p
3d104p
2P
−0.059
−0.029
0.911
0.001
0.056
0.034
−0.908
0.002
4s4p
4P(3P)
−0.98
−0.01
0.01
0.96
0.01
−0.02
−0.99
−0.01
4D(3P)
−0.02
0.63
−0.32
0.01
−0.02
0.01
−0.66
0.04
0.02
0.26
−0.46
0.14
0.08
0.31
0.88
0.12
4F(3P)
0.02
0.95
−0.02
−0.02
−0.82
0.01
0.15
−0.02
−0.90
0.08
1.00
2P(3P)
0.36
0.59
−0.02
0.03
0.02
−0.03
0.62
−0.03
−0.26
0.03
2D(3P)
−0.27
−0.25
0.01
−0.45
−0.01
−0.01
0.15
0.84
2F(3P)
0.35
0.04
−0.06
0.54
−0.10
0.10
0.80
2P(1P)
−0.02
−0.90
−0.04
0.04
−0.03
−0.82
−0.06
−0.05
0.04
2D(1P)
−0.06
0.85
0.08
−0.79
−0.13
0.08
2F(1P)
−0.12
0.83
0.05
−0.96
0.04
Table VI
Quadrupole matrix elements between states of the same J, L and S. (The complete dipole and quadrupole matrix element table is in IBM Research Report RW 109, available from the IBM Watson Laboratory, 612 West 115 Street, New York, New York 10025.)
(J, J)
BJJ
4F9/2
bp′−bd′
4F7/2
4D7/2
z2F7/2
y2F7/2
4F5/2
4D5/2
4P5/2
z2F5/2
y2F5/2
z2D5/2
y2D5/2
4F3/2
4D3/2
4P3/2
z2D3/2
y2D3/2
z2P3/2
y2P3/2
Table VII
Calculated and observed dipole and quadrupole hfs.
M. Elbel & W. Fischer, Z. Physik 165 151 (1962); A. Blachman, D. A. Landman and A. Lurio, Phys. Rev. 181, 70 (1969.)
S. Wagner, Z. Physik 141 122 (1955).
H. Bucka, J. Ney, and K. P. Wirtnik, Z. Physik 202 22 (1967).
Reference 11.