Hyperfine structure and isotopic shift of the nPJ2levels (n=7–10) of

Abstract

Hyperfine structure and isotopic shift of the n 2PJ levels (n = 7-10) of 203,205TI measured by Doppler-free two-photon spectroscopy

Measurement of7p1/2-state hyperfine structure and7s1/2-Ranjit1, Kealhofer2, Vukasin3 et al. 2014Phys. Rev. A

“…This experimental quantity can be combined with nuclear structure calculations regarding the magnetic moment and charge distributions in the isotopes to infer a value for the mean square isotopic change in these distributions. Such a calculation has been performed for both the ground 6p states and the excited 7s 203 Tl ), we note that our result is in statistical disagreement with the original 1988 result [14], though the agreement is improved when comparing to the later paper [16] which refers to a 'corrected evaluation'. Using the value derived for the level isotope shift of the 7s 1/2 state of +409.0(3.8) MHz [4], we can infer a 7p 1/2 -state level isotope shift of I 7p = −125.4(4.0) MHz.…”

“…In the present paper, we report new measurements of the 7p 1/2 excited-state HFS in the two naturally occurring isotopes of thallium. While results for these intervals were reported by the Giessen group in 1988 [14], those particular intervals were never re-measured. As discussed below, our new results for both isotopes are roughly 20 MHz larger than those reported in [14].…”

“…While results for these intervals were reported by the Giessen group in 1988 [14], those particular intervals were never re-measured. As discussed below, our new results for both isotopes are roughly 20 MHz larger than those reported in [14]. Given the ∼ 1 MHz quoted uncertainties of both sets of results, it is possible that the calibration errors in the older results can again explain this discrepancy.…”

“…Having calibration-corrected all frequency intervals, final mean values were computed both by taking the weighted average of all individual sweep results, as well [14]. However, as can be seen in Table II, the two sets of experimental results disagree significantly.…”

“…In the late 1980s, a group from U. Giessen completed a series of HFS and IS measurements of thallium excited states using pulsed and cw laser excitation [14,15]. A subset of these measurements were later corrected due to self-reported 'calibration and linearization errors' [16].…”