THE ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL, 530: 10851090, 2000 February 20

2000. The American Astronomical Society. All rights reserved. Printed in U.S.A. (
ELECTRON-IMPACT EXCITATIONS OF HYDROGENIC IONS IN STRONGLY COUPLED PLASMAS
YOUNG-DAE JUNG
Department of Physics, Hanyang University, Ansan, Kyunggi-Do 425-791, South Korea; yjung=bohr.hanyang.ac.kr
AND
JUNG-SIK YOON
Max-Planck-Institute for Physics of Complex Systems, Strasse 38, D-01187 Dresden, Germany; No thnitzer ysyoon=mpipks-dresden.mpg.de
Received 1999 June 24; accepted 1999 October 6
ABSTRACT
Plasma screening eects are investigated on electron-ion collisional excitations in strongly coupled
plasmas. Scaled cross sections for excitation is obtained using the ion-sphere model 1s ]2p
0
(m\0)
potential with the close-encounter eects. Ground and excited bound wave functions in strongly coupled
plasmas are obtained using the Ritz variation and perturbation methods. The semiclassical straight-line
trajectory approximation is applied to the motion of the projectile electron in order to investigate the
variation of the transition probabilities as a function of the impact parameter and ion-sphere radius. The
transition probability neglecting the screening eects on the target atomic wave functions is found to be
greater than that including the screening eects on the target atomic wave functions. It is shown that the
target screening eects are slightly decreased with an increase of the projectile energy.
Subject headings: atomic processes plasmas
1. INTRODUCTION
The detailed study of the motion of electrons in the eld
of a nucleus has been made possible by quite recent devel-
opments in experimental and calculational techniques.
Moreover, electron-ion collisional excitation in dense
plasmas (Shevelko & Vainshtein 1993; Jung 1993a; Jung
1995a; Yoon & Jung 1996) has received much attention
since it has applications in many areas of physics, such as
atomic physics, astrophysics, and plasma physics. Dense
plasmas in laboratory and astrophysical environments can
be classied as weakly and strongly coupled plasmas
according to the strength of coupling due to Coulomb inter-
action in plasmas. The plasmas with values of the plasma
coupling parameter much smaller than unity, ![\(e2/b)/
kT ], may be called weakly coupled plasmas; those with the
plasma coupling parameter around or greater than unity,
where b and T are the interparticle distance and tem-
perature, may be called strongly coupled plasmas. A
description of the strongly coupled plasmas is provided by
the ion-sphere (or Wigner-Seitz) model (Salpeter 1954; Ich-
imaru 1986; Kobzev & Iakubov 1995; Jung & Jeong 1996).
Astrophysical dense plasmas are those we nd in the inte-
riors, surfaces, and outer envelops of astrophysical objects,
such as neutron stars, white dwarfs, the Sun, etc. The ion-
sphere model has played an important part in elucidating
the properties of the strongly coupled plasmas (Salpeter
1954; Kobzev & Iakubov 1995). The opacity of stellar
matter is a quantity of fundamental importance in the equa-
tions of stellar structure. Quantitative analyses of the
spectra of astronomical sources of photons and of the
atomic processes that populate the atomic energy levels and
give rise to the observed absorption and emission require
accurate data on transition frequencies, wave functions,
transition probabilities, and cross sections. The electron-ion
collision processes in the stellar interior are strongly
aected by the screening of the dense plasma electrons and
the bound-electron wave functions are no longer Coulom-
bic. Thus, the emission due to the electron-impact excita-
tion of ions in the stellar interior may dier considerably
from that in the stellar atmosphere. We shall carefully inves-
tigate the character in strongly coupled plasmas, such as
stellar interiors, using a screened ion-sphere model inter-
action potential. In particular, we shall investigate the
plasma screening eects on electron-impact excitation of
hydrogenic ions in strongly coupled plasmas since there are
an enormous number of free electrons produced by ioniza-
tion of atoms in hot and dense plasmas. Spectral lines
emitted from highly charged ions play an important role in
the diagnostic of hot and dense plasmas. Thus, we obtained
the screened ground and excited wave functions and its
eigenenergies of hydrogenic ions with the ion-sphere poten-
tial using the Ritz variation and perturbation methods. We
also use the straight-line (SL) trajectory method in the semi-
classical approximation (SCA) to visualize the motion of the
projectile electron as a function of the impact parameter
and ion-sphere radius. There was a similar work using the
dipole approximation for inelastic electron-impact excita-
tions in strongly coupled plasmas (Jung 1995a). However, in
that paper the maximum position of the transition prob-
ability and the target screening eects could not be investi-
gated since the impact parameter (b) range was restricted
such as where is the rst b 4a
Z
, a
Z
(4a
0
/Z\+2/Zme2)
Bohr radius of a hydrogenic ion with nuclear charge Z.
Thus, in this paper we investigate the target screening eects
on electron-ion collisional excitations in strongly coupled
plasma including the close-encounter eects. The results
show that the target screening eects are signicant and
cannot be neglected in excitation processes in strongly
coupled plasmas. The target screening eects are slightly
decreased with an increase of the energy of the projectile
electron. It is also found that the maximum position of the
transition probability is slightly shifted to the target nucleus
when the target screening eects are included. The screened
wave functions and energy levels will be quite useful to
obtain the absorption and emission coefficients in dense
astrophysical plasmas such as in the stellar interior. These
results provide a general description of the atomic tran-
sition probabilities in strongly coupled plasmas.
1085
1086 JUNG & YOON Vol. 530
In 2, the target wave functions (1s, 2p) of a hydrogenic
ion in strongly coupled plasmas are obtained by the Ritz
variation and perturbation methods. Also, its eigenenergies
are obtained. In 3, we obtain a closed form of the 1s ]2p
0
dipole transition probabilities including the close-encounter
eects and investigate the variation of the transition prob-
abilities with a charge of the plasma screening eects
through the ion-sphere radius. Finally, in 4, conclusions
are given.
2. SCREENED TARGET WAVE FUNCTIONS AND ENERGIES
Equations 2.1. Schrodinger
When an atom is embedded in plasmas, its wave func-
tions and energies are dierent from those of a free atom
because the nucleus is shielded by the surrounding plasma.
In the strongly coupled region (!1), the concept of
Debye screening as a cooperative phenomenon is no longer
applicable. In this case, the ion-sphere model is known to be
quite reliable to describe the interaction potential in strong-
ly coupled plasmas (Jung 1995a; Jung & Jeong 1996; Jung
& Gould 1991). For simplicity, we consider a collision
system consisting of the electron incident on a hydrogenic
ion with nuclear charge Z. Then, the ion-sphere radius (or
the Wigner-Seitz radius) is given by the neutralizing R
Z
plasma electron,
R
Z
\
C3(Z[1)
4nn
e
D1@3
, (1)
where is the density of the plasma electron. Since the n
e
target ion is surrounded by the plasma electron, the eective
nuclear charge Z@ can be given by
Z@ \Z[d , (2)
where d is the screening constant due to the plasma elec-
trons. Thus, the radial equation for a hydrog- Schro dinger
enic ions with nuclear charge Z in strongly coupled plasmas
is given by
G
[
+2
2m
C d2
dr2
[
l(l ]1)
r2
D
[
Z@e2
r
H
P
nl
(r) \E
nl
P
nl
(r) , (3)
where n and l are, respectively, the principal and orbital
quantum numbers, and is the radial wave function of the P
nl
nlth shell. Here, we consider a simple analytic method to
obtain the solutions of equation (3), because the simple
analytic solutions are more convenient to use for calcu-
lating the atomic properties and the transition probabilities.
The solutions for equation (3) are assumed to be the
hydrogenic forms, then the trial 1s and 2p wave functions
are given, respectively,
P
1s
(r) 4rR
1s
(r) \2a~2@3re~r@a , (4)
P
2p
(r) 4rR
2p
(r) \
1
2J6
a~5@2r2e~r@2a , (5)
where a is the variation parameter, and this variation
parameter becomes for vanishing plasma eects a
Z
( \a
0
/Z)
in strongly coupled plasma. This parameter will (R
Z
]O)
be determined for the ground and 2p excited states in fol-
lowing subsections.
2.2. Ground State (1s)
In the above section, we mentioned the ion-sphere radius
this means the radius of a sphere with the characteristic R
Z
;
volume Thus, the screening correction on the n
e
~1. d
1s
ground state due to the plasma electron is obtained by the
perturbation method, since d
1s
\Z,
d
1s
\4n
P
0
aZ{ 3(Z[1)
4nR
Z
3
r2dr
+
(Z[1)(a
Z
/R
Z
)3
1 [3[1 [(1/Z)](a
Z
/R
Z
)3
]
6
Z2
C (Z[1)(a
Z
/R
Z
)3
M1 [3[1 [(1/Z)](a
Z
/R
Z
)3N
D3
, (6)
where the upper bound is the a
Z
{
[4a
0
/Z@ \Za
Z
/(Z[d
1s
)]
peak position of the 1s wave function, i.e., the screened rst
Bohr radius, since the screening eect is determined by the
charge interior to A recent investigation (Jung & Gould a
Z
{
.
1991) shows that the wave functions and energies for many
electron atoms obtained by the screening eects using the
charge interior to the position of the screened electron are
quite reliable and in close agreement with the results of
Hartree-Fock calculations and with experimental values.
Then the appropriate form of the 1s screening constant is
given by
d
1s
+(Z[1)
Aa
Z
R
Z
B3
]
3
Z
(Z[1)2
Aa
Z
R
Z
B6
. (7)
The expectation value of the ground-state energy of a
hydrogenic ion is given by equations (3) and (4),
SE
1s
(a)T \
+2
2m
1
a2
[
(Z[d
1s
)e2
a
. (8)
Here, the parameter a is obtained from the minimization of
i.e., SE
1s
(a)T, LSE
1s
(a)T/La \0,
a
1s
+a
Z
NC
1 [
A
1 [
1
Z
BAa
Z
R
Z
B3
[3
A
1 [
1
Z
B2Aa
Z
R
Z
B6D
. (9)
Thus, using equations (9) and (10), we can obtain the energy
of the ground state as
SE
1s
(a
1s
)T +[Z(Z[d
1s
)Ry
]
C
1 [
1
Z
(Z[1)
Aa
Z
R
Z
B3
[
3
Z2
(Z[1)2
Aa
Z
R
Z
B6D
, (10)
where Ry (\me4/2+2 +13.6 eV) is the Rydberg constant.
2.3. Excited State (2p)
The 2p screening constant can be obtained by d
2p
d
2p
\4n
P
0
4aZ{ 3(Z[1)
4nR
Z
3
r2dr
+
(Z[1)(4a
Z
/R
Z
)3
M1 [3[1 [(1/Z](4a
Z
/R
Z
)3N
]
6
Z2
A (Z[1)(4a
Z
/R
Z
)3
M1 [3[1 [(1/Z)](4a
Z
/R
Z
)3N
B3
, (11)
where the upper bound is given by 4a
Z
{
[44a
0
/Z@ \
since the screening eect on the 2p state is 4Za
Z
/(Z[d
2p
)],
determined by the charge interior to the peak position of
the screened 2p wave function.
No. 2, 2000 PLASMA SCREENING EFFECTS IN COUPLED PLASMAS 1087
As we obtained in the previous subsection, the appropri-
ate form of the 2p screening constant is found to be
d
2p
+(Z[1)
A4a
Z
R
Z
B3
]
3
Z
(Z[1)2
A4a
Z
R
Z
B6
, (12)
and the expectation value of the 2p excited state energy can
be obtained by equations (3) and (5),
SE
2p
(a)T \
+2
2m
1
4a2
[
(Z[d
2p
)e2
4a
. (13)
The parameter a can also be obtained from the mini-
mization of then SE
2p
(a)T,
a
2p
+a
Z
NC
1 [
1
Z
(Z[1)
A4a
Z
R
Z
B3
[
3
Z2
(Z[1)2
A4a
Z
R
Z
B6D
,
(14)
thus, the energy of the 2p state becomes
SE
2p
(a
2p
)T + [
Z
4
(Z[d
2p
)Ry
]
C
1 [
1
Z
(Z[1)
A4a
Z
R
Z
B3
[
3
Z2
(Z[1)2
A4a
Z
R
Z
B6D
.
(15)
3. ELECTRON-IMPACT EXCITATIONS
In the semiclassical approximation, the cross section for
excitation from the unperturbed atomic state to n[t
n,l,m
(r)]
a state becomes (Jung 1993b) n@[t
n
{
,l
{
,m
{
(r)]
p
n
{
,n
\2n
P
b db o T
n
{
,n
(b) o2 , (16)
where is the transition amplitude and b is the impact T
n
{
,n
(b)
parameter. From the rst-order time-dependent pertur-
bation theory (Jung 1995b), the transition amplitude T
n
{
,n
(b)
is given by the interaction potential V (r, R),
T
n
{
,n
\[
i
+
P
~=
=
dteiun{,nSn@ o V (r, R) o nT , (17)
where and are the energies of u
n
{
,n
\(E
n
{
[E
n
)/+, E
n
E
n
{
atomic states n and n@, respectively and where r and R are
the position vectors of the target electron and the projectile
electron, respectively. In the limit of high densities and low
temperatures, the magnitude of the electrostatic interaction
energy is much greater than that of the kinetic energy.
Under these conditions, the ion-sphere model (Salpeter
1954; Kobzev & Iakubov 1995; Jung & Jeong 1996) is
known to be quite reliable to describe the interaction poten-
tial. In a recent paper (Jung & Jeong 1996), the electron-ion
Coulomb bremsstrahlung in strongly coupled plasmas was
investigated using the ion-sphere model interaction poten-
tial. In the ion-sphere model, the interaction potential is
given by
V (r, R) \
A
[
Ze2
R
]
e2
o r [Ro
B
]
C
1 [
R
2R
Z
A
3 [
R2
R
Z
2
BD
h(R
Z
[R) , (18)
where h(x) (\1 for x 0; \0 for x \0) is the step func-
tion. As we see in equation (16), the plasma screening eect
would be reduced with an increase of the ion-sphere radius
To investigate the plasma screening eect on the excita- R
Z
.
tion probability in strongly coupled plasmas as a function
of the impact parameter and ion-sphere radius, we use the
classical trajectory method (Jung 1995b) to describe the
projectile motion R(t). When the projectile is moving in the
z-direction and a coordinate system is chosen with the
origin at the target atom, in the semiclassical (SL) trajectory
method, the position of the projectile electron is written as a
function of time, t, and the impact parameter b,
R(t) \by ]vtz , (19)
where v is the velocity of the projectile electron. This
straight-line trajectory method is known to be quite reliable
to describe the motion of the high-energy projectiles
(McGuire 1997). In the ion-sphere model, the time interval
of the interaction between the projectile electron and target
ion is given by
[
1
v
JR
Z
2 [b2 \t \
1
v
JR
Z
2 [b2 ; (20)
then, the transition amplitude becomes
T
n
{
,n
\[
i
+
P
~=
=
dteiun{,n
]
C
1 [
R
2R
Z
A
3 [
R2
R
Z
2
BD
F
n
{
,n
(R, r) , (21)
where is the atomic form factor, F
n
{
,n
(R, r)
F
n
{
,n
(R, r) \
T
n@
K 1
o R[r o
K
n
U
. (22)
For 1s ]2p dipole transition, there are three possible chan-
nels depending on the magnetic substate (m\0, ^1) of the
2p state (Rose 1998). Here, we shall consider the excitation
to m\0 state, i.e., state, since we assume that the pro- 2p
0
jectile is moving in the quantization z-axis.
Using the addition theorem (Jeereys & Jeereys 1956)
with the spherical harmonics Y
lm
1
o R[r o
\ ;
l/0
=
;
m/~l
l 4n
2l ]1
r
:
l
r
;
l`1
Y
lm
(r)Y
lm
* (R) , (23)
where is the larger (smaller) of R and r. Then, we can r
;
(r
:
)
easily obtain the atomic form factor for the 1s ]2p
0
(m\0) excitation case,
F
2p
0
,1s
\
4J2
a
Z
(g
2p
5@2 g
1s
3@2)
q
R13b
6
5
]
C
1 [
A
1 ]R1b
6
]
1
2
R12b
6
2 ]
1
8
R13b
6
3
B
e~R1 b
6
[
1
24
R13b
6
3(1 ]R1
Z
b
6
)e~R1 Z b
6
D
, (24)
where the terms proportional to are the close- e~R1 b
6
encounter eects. In the previous research (Jung 1995a),
these eects were neglected in the dipole approximation so
that the investigation on the behavior of the transition
probability for small impact parameters was impossible and
also the plasma screening eects on the atomic states of
target ion were completely ignored. However, we shall keep
these terms to investigate the behavior of the transition
0 2 4 6 8
Scaled Impact Parameter
0
0.0001
0.0002
0.0003
0.0004
S
c
a
l
e
d
T
r
a
n
s
i
t
i
o
n
P
r
o
b
a
b
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
HaL
0 2 4 6 8
Scaled Impact Parameter
0
0.00001
0.00002
0.00003
0.00004
0.00005
0.00006
S
c
a
l
e
d
T
r
a
n
s
i
t
i
o
n
P
r
o
b
a
b
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
HbL
1088 JUNG & YOON Vol. 530
probabilities for small impact parameters. Here, R1(4
and R/a
Z
) \(v62t2 ]b
6
2)1@2, R1
Z
4R
Z
/a
Z
, v6 4v/a
Z
, b
6
4b/a
Z
,
with b
6
\g
1s
](g
2p
/2)
g
1s
\
C
1 [
1
Z
(Z[1)
Aa
Z
R
Z
B3 3
Z2
(Z[1)2
Aa
Z
R
Z
B6D
, (25)
g
2p
\
C
1 [
1
Z
(Z[1)
A4a
Z
R
Z
B3 3
Z2
(Z[1)2
A4a
Z
R
Z
B6D
. (26)
Thus, the close form of the transition amplitude, 1s ]2p
0
including the plasma screening eects, becomes
T
2p
0
,1s
\
8J2
ZJv
(g
2p
5@2 g
1s
3@2)
P
0
(Z
2
~
2
)
1@2
dq
q sin [*/(ZJv)q]
R13b
6
5
]
C
1 [
3R1
2R1
Z
]
R13
2R1
Z
3
D
]
C
1 [
A
1 ]R1b
6
]
1
2
R12b
6
2 ]
1
8
R13b
6
3
B
e~R1 b
6
[
1
24
R13b
6
3(1 ]R1
Z
b
6
)e~R1 Z b
6
D
, (27)
where v is the scaled projectile energy, [41
2
mv2/(Z2Ry)]
and q \v6t, *4[[(Z[d
2p
)/8]g
2p
][(Z[d
1s
)/2]g
1s
.
From equation (16), the scaled semiclassical exci- 1s ]2p
0
tation cross section can be written as
Z4p
2p
0
,1s
na
0
2
\2
P
db
6
b
6
P1
2p
0
,1s
(b
6
) , (28)
where is the scaled transition probability, P1
2p
0
,1s
P1
2p
0
,1s
(b
6
) \Z~2 o T
2p
0
,1s
(b
6
) o 2 . (29)
Thus, the scaled transition probability including 1s ]2p
0
the plasma screening eects on the target wave functions
becomes
b
6
P1
2p
0
,1s
\
27
v
(g
2p
5 g
1s
3 )b
6
K P
0
(Z
2
~
2
)
1@2
dq
]
q sin [*/(ZJv)q]
R13b
6
5
A
1 [
3R1
2R1
Z
]
R13
2R1
Z
3
B
]
C
1 [
A
1 ]R1b
6
]
1
2
R12b
6
2 ]
1
8
R13b
6
3
B
e~R1 b
6
[
1
24
R13b
6
3(1 ]R1
Z
b
6
)e~R1 Z b
6
DK2
. (30)
If we do not include the plasma screening eects on the
target wave functions, i.e., the transition b
6
\3/2, 1s ]2p
0
amplitude is found to be
T
2p
0
,1s
@ \
1
ZJv
28J2
35
P
0
(Z
2
~
2
)
1@2
dq
]
q sin [3/(8Jv)q]
R13
A
1 [
3R1
2R1
Z
]
R13
2R1
Z
3
B
]
C
1 [
A
1 ]
3
2
R1 ]
9
8
R12 ]
27
64
R13
B
e~3@(2R1 )
[
9
64
R13
A
1 ]
3
2
R1
Z
B
e~3@(2R1 Z)
D
, (31)
where the prime stands for neglecting the plasma screening
eects on the atomic wave functions. Then, the 1s ]2p
0
transition probability without the plasma screening eects
on the atomic wave functions is found to be
b
6
P1
2p
0
,1s
@ \
1
v
217
310
b
6
K P
0
(Z
2
~
2
)
1@2
dq
]
q sin [3/(8Jv)q]
R13
C
1 [
3R1
2R1
Z
]
R13
2R1
Z
3
D
]
C
1 [
A
1 ]
3
2
R1 ]
9
8
R12 ]
27
64
R13
B
e~3@(2R1 )
[
9
64
R13
A
1 ]
3
2
R1
Z
B
e~3@2(R1 Z)
DK2
. (32)
In order to specically investigate the target screening
eects on the transition probability, we consider Z\2 and
two cases of the projectile energy: v \9 and 25, since the
semiclassical straight-line trajectory method is known to be
valid for high-energy projectiles (Bethe & Jackiw 1986). We
also consider the three cases of the ion-sphere radius, R1
Z
\
8, 12, and 16. Figures 1, 2, and 3 show the scaled 1s ]2p
0
transition probabilities as functions of the scaled impact
FIG. 1.Scaled transition probabilities for 1s ]2p
0
b
6
P1
2p
0
,1s
(b
6
) R1
Z
\8.
Solid lines represent the transition probability given by eq. (30) (including
the plasma screening eects on the target wave functions) ; dashed lines
represent the transition probability given by eq. (32) (neglecting the plasma
screening eects on the target wave functions). (a) v \9; (b) v \25.
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Scaled Impact Parameter
0
0.0002
0.0004
0.0006
0.0008
0.001
0.0012
0.0014
S
c
a
l
e
d
T
r
a
n
s
i
t
i
o
n
P
r
o
b
a
b
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
HaL
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Scaled Impact Parameter
0
0.000025
0.00005
0.000075
0.0001
0.000125
0.00015
0.000175
S
c
a
l
e
d
T
r
a
n
s
i
t
i
o
n
P
r
o
b
a
b
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
HbL
0 2.5 5 7.5 10 12.5 15
Scaled Impact Parameter
0
0.0005
0.001
0.0015
0.002
0.0025
S
c
a
l
e
d
T
r
a
n
s
i
t
i
o
n
P
r
o
b
a
b
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
HaL
0 2.5 5 7.5 10 12.5 15
Scaled Impact Parameter
0
0.00005
0.0001
0.00015
0.0002
0.00025
0.0003
0.00035
S
c
a
l
e
d
T
r
a
n
s
i
t
i
o
n
P
r
o
b
a
b
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
HbL
No. 2, 2000 PLASMA SCREENING EFFECTS IN COUPLED PLASMAS 1089
FIG. 2.Scaled transition probabilities for 1s ]2p
0
b
6
P1
2p
0
,1s
(b
6
) R1
Z
\
The solid lines represent the transition probability given by eq. 12.
(30) (including the plasma screening eects on the target wave functions) ;
the dashed lines represent the transition probability given by eq. (32)
(neglecting the plasma screening eects on the target wave functions). (a)
v \9; (b) v \25.
parameter for various ion-sphere radii. The scaled tran-
sition probabilities neglecting the target screening eects
are also illustrated. As we see in these gures, the transition
probabilities neglecting the plasma screening eects on the
target atomic wave functions are found to be always greater
than those including the target screening eects since the
target screening eects reduce the strength of the Coulomb
interaction provided by the target ion core. The target
screening eects are slightly decreased with an increase of
the projectile energy (i.e., B10.9% for v \9 and R1
Z
\8,
B10.5% for v \25 and The maximum values of R1
Z
\8).
the scaled transition probabilities are given in 1s ]2p
0
Table 1. The maximum positions are also indicated in par-
FIG. 3.Scaled transition probabilities for 1s ]2p
0
b
6
P1
2p
0
,1s
(b
6
) R1
Z
\
The solid lines represent the transition probability given by eq. 16.
(30) (including the plasma screening eects on the target wave functions) ;
the dashed lines represent the transition probability given by eq. (32)
(neglecting the plasma screening eects on the target wave functions). (a)
v \9; (b) v \25.
entheses. The maximum position of the transition probabil-
ity corresponds to the position that takes place in the
dipole excitation process. The maximum position 1s ]2p
0
of the transition probability is slightly shifted to the target
nucleus as the target screening eect is included.
4. SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION
We investigate the target screening eects on electron-ion
collisional excitations in strongly coupled plasmas. The
scaled cross sections for is obtained using the ion- 1s ]2p
0
sphere model potential. The screened ground and excited
bound wave functions are obtained using the Ritz variation
and perturbation methods including the target screening
TABLE 1
MAXIMUM VALUES OF THE SCALED TRANSITION PROBABILITIES FOR Z\2 1s ]2p
0
Probability R1
Z
\8 R1
Z
\12 R1
Z
\16
b
6
P1
2p
0
,1s
(v \9) . . . . . . . 0.00042558 (b
6
\1.17) 0.00135136 (b
6
\1.43) 0.00249664 (b
6
\1.62)
b
6
P1
2p
0
,1s
@ (v \9) . . . . . . . 0.00047196 (b
6
\1.16) 0.00137948 (b
6
\1.42) 0.00251603 (b
6
\1.61)
b
6
P1
2p
0
,1s
(v \25) . . . . . . 0.00005728 (b
6
\1.18) 0.00018662 (b
6
\1.44) 0.00035561 (b
6
\1.61)
b
6
P1
2p
0
,1s
@ (v \25) . . . . . . 0.00006329 (b
6
\1.16) 0.00019018 (b
6
\1.43) 0.00035800 (b
6
\1.63)
1090 JUNG & YOON
eects. The semiclassical straight-line trajectory approx-
imation is applied to the motion of the projectile electron in
order to investigate the variation of the transition probabil-
ities as a function of the impact parameter and ion-sphere
radius. The results show that the target screening eects are
signicant and cannot be neglected. The target screening
eects are slightly decreased as the projectile energy
increases. The maximum position of the transition prob-
ability is slightly shifted to the target nucleus with including
the target screening eects. A recent paper (Hong & Jung
1996) shows that the line intensities are directly related to
the 1s ]2p excitation rates. Thus, the 1s ]2p excitation
probability in dense plasmas would be expected to provide
to information of the plasma temperature in the astro-
physical dense plasmas. These results provide a general
description of the atomic transition probabilities in dense
astrophysical plasmas.
One of the authors (Y.-D. J.) gratefully acknowledges
R. J. Gould for his useful comments and warm hospitality
while visiting the University of California, San Diego. The
authors would like to thank E. Herbst for suggesting
improvements to this text. This work was supported by the
Korean Ministry of Education through the Brain Korea
(BK21) Project, by the Research Fund of Hanyang Uni-
versity (Project no. HYU-99-040), by the interdisciplinary
research program of the Korea Science and Engineering
Foundation through Grant no. 1999-1-111-001-5, and by
the Korea Basic Science Institute through the HANBIT
User Development Program (FY2000).
REFERENCES
Bethe, H. A., & Jackiw, R. 1986, Intermediate Quantum Mechanics (Menlo
Park: Benjamin-Cummings)
Hong, W., & Jung, Y.-D. 1996, Phys. Plasmas, 3, 2457
Ichimaru, S. 1986, Plasma Physics: An Introduction to Statistical Physics
of Charged Particles (Redwood City: Addison-Wesley)
Jereys, H., & Jereys, B. 1956, Methods of Mathematical Physics
(Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press)
Jung, Y.-D. 1993a, Phys. Fluids B, 5, 3432
. 1993b, AJ, 409, 841
. 1995a, Phys. Plasmas, 2, 1775
. 1995b, Phys. Plasmas, 2, 332
. 1998, Phys. Plasmas, 5, 799
Jung, Y.-D., & Gould, R. J. 1991, Phys. Rev. A, 44, 111
Jung, Y.-D., & Jeong, H.-D. 1996, Phys. Rev. E, 54, 1912
Kobzev, G. A., Iakubov, I. T., & Popovich, M. M. 1995, Transport and
Optical Properties of Nonideal Plasma (New York: Plenum)
McGuire, J. H. 1997, Electron Correlation Dynamics in Atomic Collisions
(Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press)
Rose, W. K. 1998, Advanced Stellar Astrophysics (Cambridge: Cambridge
Univ. Press)
Salpeter, E. E. 1954, Australian J. Phys., 7, 373
Shevelko, V. P., & Vainshtein, L. A. 1993, Atomic Physics for Hot Plasmas
(Bristol : Institute of Physics)
Yoon, J.-S., & Jung, Y.-D. 1996, Phys. Plasmas, 3, 3291