K. C. Young
University of Pennsylvania
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by K. C. Young.
Nuclear Physics | 1977
D. P. Balamuth; J.M. Lind; K. C. Young; R.W. Zurmühle
Abstract Angular correlation measurements using the 14 C(t, pγ) 16 C reaction result in the following spin assignments to levels in 16 C: E x = 1.766 MeV, J = 2; E x = 3.980 MeV, J = 2; E x = 4.083 MeV, J = 3; E x = 4.138 MeV, J = 4.
Nuclear Physics | 1979
K. C. Young; R. W. Zurmuhle; J.M. Lind; D. P. Balamuth
Abstract A study of the region of excitation energy between 17.5 and 22 MeV has been carried out using angular correlation techniques. Alpha decays of continuum levels populated using the 12 C( 16 O, α) 24 Mg reaction were observed to the ground state and first two excited states of 20 Ne. Double (α-α) and, in some cases, triple (α-α-γ) angular correlation measurements were carried out for levels at E x = 17.60, 17.86, 18.19, 18.56, 19.14, and 21.3 MeV. Branching ratios were determined for all of the above levels plus additional states at E x = 19.37, 20.57 and 20.90 MeV. In most cases spin assignments could not be made from the angular correlations, either because of a strong continuum background or because the groups turned out to consist of more than one level. A search for a direct γ-decay branch of the E x = 21.3 MeV level was carried out; a limit Γ γ /Γ J π = 10 + level at this energy.
Nuclear Physics | 1979
K. C. Young; J.M. Lind; R. W. Zurmuhle; D. P. Balamuth
Abstract Direct coincidence observation of α- and γ-decays of the Ex = 12.0 MeV level populated in the 12 C ( 16 O , α) 24 Mg reaction has been used to show that both 6+ and 3− levels exist near this excitation energy. Comparison of the present work with previous radiative capture studies permits the conclusion that the 63+ level in 24Mg decays primarily by γ-emission, in agreement with recent shell-model calculations using an (sd)8 basis. Absolute E2 and M1 strengths deduced from the data are not, however, in good quantitative agreement with the predictions of the shell model.
Physical Review C | 1978
David E. Alburger; D. P. Balamuth; J.M. Lind; L. Mulligan; K. C. Young; R. W. Zurmuhle; R. Middleton
Physical Review C | 1976
S. L. Tabor; K. C. Young; D. P. Balamuth; R. W. Zurmuhle
Physical Review C | 1976
S. L. Tabor; K. C. Young; D. P. Balamuth; R. W. Zurmuhle
Physical Review C | 1975
S. L. Tabor; K. C. Young; D. P. Balamuth; R. W. Zurmuhle
Physical Review C | 1981
K. C. Young; D. P. Balamuth; J.M. Lind; R.W. Zurmuehle
Physical Review C | 1979
Cheng-Ming Fou; D. P. Balamuth; R.W. Zurmuehle; K. C. Young
Physical Review C | 1979
Cheng-Ming Fou; D. P. Balamuth; R. W. Zurmuhle; K. C. Young