1. News on 12 C from  -decay studies Hans O. U. Fynbo Department of Physics and Astronomy University of Aarhus, Denmark What’s left to study in 12 C ? New results from  -decay studies Tokyo, June 4, 2007

2. What’s left to study in 12 C ? ++++ (11.2) (0/2 + ) 0+0+ (2 + ) (15.3) 3-3- 1-1- 2-2- 9.641 10.3 10.84 11.83 7.65 12.71 1+1+ 14.08 13.35 15.11 (2 -, 4 - ) 4+4+ 1+1+ 7.275 4.4389 0 2+2+ 0+0+ 8 Be +  10.27 2+2+ 7.377 0+0+ 7.275  Levels according to TUNL Ongoing theoretical interest : Ab-initio VMC or Greens-Function MC No core shell-modelQM-060, QW-070 AMD/FMD F1-1, F10-1, QW-062 Algebraic calculations Bijker &Iachello Cluster models QM-054, QT-021,QT-039, QW-015, QW-017 Condensate states ? Q5-5, F3-2, QT-050-51 Astrophysics

3. Talk : O. Tengblad (F1-3) Posters : M. Alcorta, O. Kirsebom (QT-206)) 10 B( 3 He,p) 12 C Why is it experimentally challenging ?

4. (11.5) 0,2 + 0+0+ 10.3 7.6542 12.71 1+1+ 15.11 1+1+ 7.275 (2 + ) (15.3) 4. 4389 0 2+2+ 0+0+ 0.972(3) 0.0125(5) 0.015(3) 0.0008(2) 0.946(6) 0.0190(3) 0.027(4) 0.0046(15) 0.0031(12) 0.000044(15)  -decay approach : Selection rules 1+1+ 1+1+ See also talk of M.Itoh (F11-7)

5. Nucl. Phys. A89 (1966) 401 Phys. Rev. 111 (1958) 567Phys. Rev. 130 (1963) 1953  12 N/ 12 B+X Target Beam  -decay approach : Earlier work

6.  12 N/ 12 B Magnetp/d 12 N/ 12 B+X 12 C/ 11 B Direct Kinematics+ISOL Nucl.Phys. A738 (2004) 59. Nucl.Phys. A760 (2005) 3. Nature 433 (2005) 136. 12 N/ 12 B+X 12 N/ 12 B  p/d 12 C/ 11 B Magnets Inverse Kinematics+Separator Talk : H.Wilschut (J2-5), Poster : R.Raabe (QT-011) Talks : J.Äystö (A1-4), L. Fraile (J2-2), H. Frånberg (J2-7)

7. ISOL Experiment 2004 12 N/ 12 B L.M. Fraile & J.Äystö, NIMA513 (2003) 287. Talks : J.Äystö (A1-4), L. Fraile (J2-2), H. Frånberg (J2-7)

8.  1+1+ 0 +, 2 + ? Christian Diget 0 +, 2 + ?

9. R.Raabe, QT-011 KVI Experiment 2006 12 N/ 12 B K. Jungmann H. Wilschut Talk J2-5.

10.  0+0+ 0 +, 2 + ? 1+1+ 1+1+ Solveig Hyldegaard 0 +, 2 + ?

11. KVI # 12 N = 8.8  10 7 IGISOL # 12 N = 1.2  10 8 Comparison of the two Experiments 1.43(7)% 2.7(4)% 0.55(2)% 0.56(7)% 0.46(15)% 0.122(7)% 0.108(15)% 0.28(8)%

12.  0 +, 2 + ? 1+1+ Christian Diget

13.  1+1+ 0 +, 2 + ? 0+0+ Solveig Hyldegaard

14. Comparison of the two Experiments 1+1+ KVI # 12 B = 9.3  10 7 IGISOL # 12 B = 9.7  10 8 0.59(4)% 1.2(3)% 0.108(4)% 0.116(13)% 0.08(2)% 3.0(2)  10 -4 % 3.4(6)  10 -4 %

15. Comparison of the two Decays 12 B 12 N

16. Comparison of the two Decays

17. R-matrix fits : Presently only to IGISOL and 8 Be(gs) Work in progress to include 8 Be(2 + ) and new data. 2+2+ 0+0+ 0+0+ Nucl.Phys. A738 (2004) 59. Nucl.Phys. A760 (2005) 3. Nature 433 (2005) 136.

18. Collaborators C. Aa. Diget, H. Jeppesen, S.Hyldegaard, H.H. Knudsen, O. Kirsebom,K. Riisager, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Århus University, Denmark B. Jonson, M. Meister, T. Nilsson, G. Nyman, K. Wilhelmsen, Fundamental Physics, Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden T. Eronen, W. Huang, J. Huikari, A. Jokinen, A. Kankainen, I. Moore, A. Nieminen, H. Penttilä, S. Rinta-Anttila, Y. Wang, J. Äystö, A. Saatamoinen, K. Perajärvi, Department of Physics, University of Jyväskylä, Finland B. Fulton, S.Fox University of York, United Kingdom. M. Alcorta, R. Boutami, M.J.G. Borge, L. Fraile, M. Madurga, O. Tengblad, M. Turrion, Instituto Estructura de la Materia, CSIC, Madrid, Spain Thank you for your attention ! F.C. Barker Australian National University K. Jungmann, S. Brandenburg, H. Wilschut, P. Dendooven, A. Rogachevskiy, G. Onderwater, E. Traykov, M. Sohani, KVI, Groningen, The Netherlands R. Raabe, J. Bücherer, Piet van Duppen, Mark Huyse, IKS, Leuven, Belgium