Precision mass measurements of magnesium isotopes and implications on the validity of the Isobaric Mass Multiplet Equation
M. Brodeur, A.A. Kwiatkowski, O.M. Drozdowski, C. Andreoiu, D., Burdette, A. Chaudhuri, U. Chowdhury, A.T. Gallant, A. Grossheim, G. Gwinner,, H. Heggen, J.D. Holt, R. Klawitter, J. Lassen, K.G. Leach, A. Lennarz, C., Nicoloff, S. Raeder, B.E. Schultz, S.R. Stroberg

TL;DR
This study measured magnesium isotopes' masses with high precision to test the Isobaric Mass Multiplet Equation, finding a significant cubic deviation that suggests potential new physics or experimental errors.
Contribution
It provides the most precise magnesium isotope mass measurements and identifies the largest known cubic coefficient in the IMME, challenging current theoretical models.
Findings
Identified a cubic coefficient of 28(7) keV in the IMME.
Measured magnesium isotope masses with up to 34 times higher precision.
Found good agreement between experimental results and ab initio calculations.
Abstract
If the mass excess of neutron-deficient nuclei and their neutron-rich mirror partners are both known, it can be shown that deviations of the Isobaric Mass Multiplet Equation (IMME) in the form of a cubic term can be probed. Such a cubic term was probed by using the atomic mass of neutron-rich magnesium isotopes measured using the TITAN Penning trap and the recently measured proton-separation energies of Cl and Ar. The atomic mass of Mg was found to be within 1.6 of the value stated in the Atomic Mass Evaluation. The atomic masses of Mg were measured to be both within 1, while being 8 and 34 times more precise, respectively. Using the Mg mass excess and previous measurements of Cl we uncovered a cubic coefficient of = 28(7) keV, which is the largest known cubic coefficient of the IMME. This departure, however, could also be…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
