2016
DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361/201526983
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Radiative rates for forbidden M1 and E2 transitions of astrophysical interest in doubly ionized iron-peak elements

Abstract: Aims. Accurate and reliable atomic data for lowly ionized Fe-peak species (Sc, Ti, V, Cr, Mn, Fe, Co, and Ni) are of paramount importance for analyzing the high-resolution astrophysical spectra currently available. The third spectra of several iron group elements have been observed in different galactic sources, such as Herbig-Haro objects in the Orion Nebula and stars like Eta Carinae. However, forbidden M1 and E2 transitions between low-lying metastable levels of doubly charged iron-peak ions have been inves… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

1
11
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
1
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…As discussed above in the comparison with the work of Hansen et al (1984), the systematic nature of the difference suggests that it is due to a different value for the 3d radial quadrupole integral rather than details of the wave function expansions of individual terms. The configuration expansions in the present work and in that of Fivet et al (2016) are very similar but differ in one key aspect. We use a somewhat contracted 4d orbital to allow for the differences in the 3d orbital between the 3d 7 and 3d 6 4s configurations, while Fivet et al (2016) employ a spectroscopic 4d orbital but a contracted 5s orbital which provides flexibility to the spectroscopic 4s.…”
Section: Transition Probabilitiessupporting
confidence: 56%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…As discussed above in the comparison with the work of Hansen et al (1984), the systematic nature of the difference suggests that it is due to a different value for the 3d radial quadrupole integral rather than details of the wave function expansions of individual terms. The configuration expansions in the present work and in that of Fivet et al (2016) are very similar but differ in one key aspect. We use a somewhat contracted 4d orbital to allow for the differences in the 3d orbital between the 3d 7 and 3d 6 4s configurations, while Fivet et al (2016) employ a spectroscopic 4d orbital but a contracted 5s orbital which provides flexibility to the spectroscopic 4s.…”
Section: Transition Probabilitiessupporting
confidence: 56%
“…There is therefore a stepwise decay through the levels and only three relevant transition probabilities, for a 4 F 3/2 -a 4 F 5/2 , a 4 F 5/2a 4 F 7/2 and a 4 F 7/2 -a 4 F 9/2 . We are aware of only two previous calculations of transition probabilities for Co iii, one by Hansen et al (1984) and one by Nussbaumer & Storey (1988), as well as one contemporary calculation by Fivet et al (2016). Nussbaumer & Storey (1988) only give values for these three probabilities and these differ by less than 1% from our values.…”
Section: Transition Probabilitiesmentioning
confidence: 57%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Excellent agreement is evident for the bulk of the transitions considered with the greatest difference of 12.7% occurring for the 3d 7 a 4 F 3/2 -3d 7 a 4 P 5/2 (4-5) transition. A much larger calculation for doubly ionized Fe-peak species has been performed recently by Fivet et al (2016) using the same suite of codes as Hansen et al (1984), and also by considering the computer package autostructure, (Eissner et al 1974;Badnell 1986), where the optimization process is carried out with a Thomas-Fermi-Dirac potential using lambda scaling parameters. Numerous doubly ionized ions of Fe, Ni and Co were considered in this publication.…”
Section: Target Description and Bound State Transitionsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This is the most sophisticated and complete report for radiative rates in Co iii to date. Within the 3d 7 complex, we vary approximately 27% on average compared with both methods of Fivet et al (2016).…”
Section: Target Description and Bound State Transitionsmentioning
confidence: 99%