Zeeman Effect and Intensity Anomalies in PbI*

David R. Wood; Kenneth L. Andrew; Athos Giacchetti; Robert D. Cowan

doi:10.1364/JOSA.58.000830

Journal of the Optical Society of America
Vol. 58,
Issue 6,
pp. 830-836
(1968)
•https://doi.org/10.1364/JOSA.58.000830

Zeeman Effect and Intensity Anomalies in PbI

David R. Wood, Kenneth L. Andrew, Athos Giacchetti, and Robert D. Cowan

Not Accessible

Your library or personal account may give you access

Get PDF
Email
Share
Get Citation
Copy Citation Text
David R. Wood, Kenneth L. Andrew, Athos Giacchetti, and Robert D. Cowan, "Zeeman Effect and Intensity Anomalies in PbI*," J. Opt. Soc. Am. 58, 830-836 (1968)

Export Citation
- BibTex
- Endnote (RIS)
- HTML
- Plain Text
Citation alert
Save article

Abstract

Spectrograms of ²⁰⁸Pb electrodeless discharge tubes operated in a field of 24025 gauss gave Zeeman patterns for fifty-eight PbI spectral transitions from 2189 to 10969 Å and yielded eighteen new g values. There was good agreement between these and the g values predicted by intermediate-coupling eigenvectors determined from least-squares level fitting. The g value of the odd level at 58517 cm⁻¹ indicates that it belongs to the 6p6d configuration instead of 6s6p³ as formerly classified.

A striking consequence of configuration interaction has been discovered which results in the total suppression of what would otherwise be a strong line in this spectrum. A predominantly 6p6d level is mixed with 6p7s and interference between the dipole matrix elements connecting respectively the 6d and 7s portions with a ground-state level causes a net dipole moment of almost exactly zero for this transition. However, even in our relatively weak magnetic field, this balance is upset by magnetic mixing of only 0.3% with a third level to enhance the line strength by at least a factor 10⁶! Two related transitions with normal pattern separations display pronounced anomalies in the relative intensities of their Zeeman components. We give a theoretical analysis and quantitative calculations to show that these anomalies are due to combined interference effects of the two types of mixing.

Full Article | PDF Article

More Like This

Zeeman Effect of As ii*

Hui Li and Kenneth L. Andrew
J. Opt. Soc. Am. 62(2) 255-260 (1972)

Zeeman Effect of P ii*

Hui Li
J. Opt. Soc. Am. 62(12) 1483-1488 (1972)

Zeeman Effect and Configuration Interaction in Germanium*

Kenneth L. Andrew, Robert D. Cowan, and Athos Giacchetti
J. Opt. Soc. Am. 57(6) 715-727 (1967)

Previous Article Next Article

Cited By

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.

Contact your librarian or system administrator
or
Login to access Optica Member Subscription

Figures (7)

You do not have subscription access to this journal. Figure files are available to subscribers only. You may subscribe either as an Optica member, or as an authorized user of your institution.

Contact your librarian or system administrator
or
Login to access Optica Member Subscription

Tables (2)

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.

Contact your librarian or system administrator
or
Login to access Optica Member Subscription

Equations (6)

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.

Contact your librarian or system administrator
or
Login to access Optica Member Subscription

Designation	Tr^a	Ms^b	Exp Ave. g	Unc	Calc. g Single config. Intermediate coupling	Calc. g value^c Pure coupling
$6 p^{2} {(\frac{3}{2}, \frac{1}{2})}_{1}$	12	67	1.501	0.002	1.500	1.500
$6 p^{2} {(\frac{3}{2}, \frac{1}{2})}_{2}$	7	36	1.279	0.003	1.283	1.333
$6 p^{2} {(\frac{3}{2}, \frac{3}{2})}_{2}$	10	39	1.227	0.002	1.217	1.167
$6 p 7 p {(\frac{1}{2}, \frac{1}{2})}_{1}$	1	1	0.719^*^d	0.008	0.669	0.667
$6 p 7 p {(\frac{1}{2}, \frac{3}{2})}_{1}$	2	3	1.467^*	0.002	1.476	1.500
$6 p 7 p {(\frac{1}{2}, \frac{3}{2})}_{2}$	1	1	1.170^*	0.002	1.171	1.167
$6 p 7 p {(\frac{3}{2}, \frac{1}{2})}_{1}$	2	1 + 1U^e	1.19^*	0.01	1.179	1.333
$6 p 8 p {(\frac{1}{2}, \frac{1}{2})}_{1}$	2	2	0.673^*	0.004		0.667
$6 p 8 p {(\frac{1}{2}, \frac{3}{2})}_{1}$	2	2	1.475^*	0.006		1.500
$6 p 8 p {(\frac{1}{2}, \frac{3}{2})}_{2}$	1	1	1.156^*	0.006		1.167
$6 p 9 p {(\frac{1}{2}, \frac{3}{2})}_{1}$	1	1	1.480^*	0.010		1.500
$6 p 9 p {(\frac{1}{2}, \frac{3}{2})}_{2}$	1	2U	(0.89^*)^f	0.10		1.167
$6 p 8 s {(\frac{1}{2}, \frac{1}{2})}_{1}$	2	10	1.313	0.005	1.333	1.333
$6 p 7 d \frac{1}{2} {[\frac{5}{2}]}_{2}$	2	13	0.802^*	0.003		0.756
$6 p 7 d \frac{1}{2} {[\frac{3}{2}]}_{2}$	2	8U	(1.252^*)	0.005		1.300
$6 p 7 d \frac{1}{2} {[\frac{5}{2}]}_{3}$	2	5U	(0.97^*)	0.03		1.111
$6 p 7 d \frac{1}{2} {[\frac{3}{2}]}_{1}$	4	17	0.835^*	0.008		0.833
$6 p 9 s {(\frac{1}{2}, \frac{1}{2})}_{1}$	1	3	1.322^*	0.004		1.333
$6 p 8 d \frac{1}{2} {[\frac{5}{2}]}_{2}$	2	3	0.842^*	0.008		0.756
$6 p 8 d \frac{1}{2} {[\frac{3}{2}]}_{2}$	1	4U	(1.230^*)	0.003		1.300
$6 p 10 s {(\frac{1}{2}, \frac{1}{2})}_{1}$	1	1U	(1.24^*)	0.05		1.333
					Two config.
$6 p 7 s {(\frac{1}{2}, \frac{1}{2})}_{1}$	10	23	1.354	0.003	1.353	1.333
$6 p 6 d \frac{1}{2} {[\frac{5}{2}]}_{2}$	3	18	0.792	0.002	0.780	0.756
$6 p 6 d \frac{1}{2} {[\frac{3}{2}]}_{2}$	1	4	1.251	0.005	1.263	1.300
$6 p 6 d \frac{1}{2} {[\frac{3}{2}]}_{1}$	3	20	0.856	0.002	0.854	0.833
$6 p 6 d \frac{1}{2} {[\frac{5}{2}]}_{3}$	2	8	1.126	0.003	1.122	1.111
$6 p 7 s {(\frac{3}{2}, \frac{1}{2})}_{2}$	2	11	1.494	0.005	1.487	1.500
$6 p 7 s {(\frac{3}{2}, \frac{1}{2})}_{1}$	4	23	1.121	0.006	1.075	1.167
$6 p 6 d \frac{3}{2} {[\frac{5}{2}]}_{2}$	1	3U	(0.97^*)	0.03	0.971	0.978

	Theoretical^a	Empirical^b
6p²: F₂(6p,6p)	1210 cm⁻¹	915 ± 61 cm⁻¹
ζ₆_p	6040	7338 ± 115
6p6d: F₂(6p,6d)	232	166 ± 10
G₁(6p,6d)	386	174 ± 23
G₃(6p,6d)	15	4 ± 2
ζ₆_p	7450	8985 ± 52
ζ₆_d	82	40 ± 41
6p7s: G₁(6p,7s)	765	774 ± 105
ζ₆_p	7410	8808 ± 75
6d–7s: R_s(6d–7s)	2380	2200
R_t(6d–7s)	1020	635
P₆_p_,6_d	3.75a₀	3.75a₀
P₆_p_,7_s	2.04a₀	2.22a₀

Designation	Tr^a	Ms^b	Exp Ave. g	Unc	Calc. g Single config. Intermediate coupling	Calc. g value^c Pure coupling
$6 p^{2} {(\frac{3}{2}, \frac{1}{2})}_{1}$	12	67	1.501	0.002	1.500	1.500
$6 p^{2} {(\frac{3}{2}, \frac{1}{2})}_{2}$	7	36	1.279	0.003	1.283	1.333
$6 p^{2} {(\frac{3}{2}, \frac{3}{2})}_{2}$	10	39	1.227	0.002	1.217	1.167
$6 p 7 p {(\frac{1}{2}, \frac{1}{2})}_{1}$	1	1	0.719^*^d	0.008	0.669	0.667
$6 p 7 p {(\frac{1}{2}, \frac{3}{2})}_{1}$	2	3	1.467^*	0.002	1.476	1.500
$6 p 7 p {(\frac{1}{2}, \frac{3}{2})}_{2}$	1	1	1.170^*	0.002	1.171	1.167
$6 p 7 p {(\frac{3}{2}, \frac{1}{2})}_{1}$	2	1 + 1U^e	1.19^*	0.01	1.179	1.333
$6 p 8 p {(\frac{1}{2}, \frac{1}{2})}_{1}$	2	2	0.673^*	0.004		0.667
$6 p 8 p {(\frac{1}{2}, \frac{3}{2})}_{1}$	2	2	1.475^*	0.006		1.500
$6 p 8 p {(\frac{1}{2}, \frac{3}{2})}_{2}$	1	1	1.156^*	0.006		1.167
$6 p 9 p {(\frac{1}{2}, \frac{3}{2})}_{1}$	1	1	1.480^*	0.010		1.500
$6 p 9 p {(\frac{1}{2}, \frac{3}{2})}_{2}$	1	2U	(0.89^*)^f	0.10		1.167
$6 p 8 s {(\frac{1}{2}, \frac{1}{2})}_{1}$	2	10	1.313	0.005	1.333	1.333
$6 p 7 d \frac{1}{2} {[\frac{5}{2}]}_{2}$	2	13	0.802^*	0.003		0.756
$6 p 7 d \frac{1}{2} {[\frac{3}{2}]}_{2}$	2	8U	(1.252^*)	0.005		1.300
$6 p 7 d \frac{1}{2} {[\frac{5}{2}]}_{3}$	2	5U	(0.97^*)	0.03		1.111
$6 p 7 d \frac{1}{2} {[\frac{3}{2}]}_{1}$	4	17	0.835^*	0.008		0.833
$6 p 9 s {(\frac{1}{2}, \frac{1}{2})}_{1}$	1	3	1.322^*	0.004		1.333
$6 p 8 d \frac{1}{2} {[\frac{5}{2}]}_{2}$	2	3	0.842^*	0.008		0.756
$6 p 8 d \frac{1}{2} {[\frac{3}{2}]}_{2}$	1	4U	(1.230^*)	0.003		1.300
$6 p 10 s {(\frac{1}{2}, \frac{1}{2})}_{1}$	1	1U	(1.24^*)	0.05		1.333
					Two config.
$6 p 7 s {(\frac{1}{2}, \frac{1}{2})}_{1}$	10	23	1.354	0.003	1.353	1.333
$6 p 6 d \frac{1}{2} {[\frac{5}{2}]}_{2}$	3	18	0.792	0.002	0.780	0.756
$6 p 6 d \frac{1}{2} {[\frac{3}{2}]}_{2}$	1	4	1.251	0.005	1.263	1.300
$6 p 6 d \frac{1}{2} {[\frac{3}{2}]}_{1}$	3	20	0.856	0.002	0.854	0.833
$6 p 6 d \frac{1}{2} {[\frac{5}{2}]}_{3}$	2	8	1.126	0.003	1.122	1.111
$6 p 7 s {(\frac{3}{2}, \frac{1}{2})}_{2}$	2	11	1.494	0.005	1.487	1.500
$6 p 7 s {(\frac{3}{2}, \frac{1}{2})}_{1}$	4	23	1.121	0.006	1.075	1.167
$6 p 6 d \frac{3}{2} {[\frac{5}{2}]}_{2}$	1	3U	(0.97^*)	0.03	0.971	0.978

	Theoretical^a	Empirical^b
6p²: F₂(6p,6p)	1210 cm⁻¹	915 ± 61 cm⁻¹
ζ₆_p	6040	7338 ± 115
6p6d: F₂(6p,6d)	232	166 ± 10
G₁(6p,6d)	386	174 ± 23
G₃(6p,6d)	15	4 ± 2
ζ₆_p	7450	8985 ± 52
ζ₆_d	82	40 ± 41
6p7s: G₁(6p,7s)	765	774 ± 105
ζ₆_p	7410	8808 ± 75
6d–7s: R_s(6d–7s)	2380	2200
R_t(6d–7s)	1020	635
P₆_p_,6_d	3.75a₀	3.75a₀
P₆_p_,7_s	2.04a₀	2.22a₀

Abstract

Cited By

Figures (7)

Tables (2)

Equations (6)

Journal of the Optical Society of America