ANS is committed to advancing, fostering, and promoting the development and application of nuclear sciences and technologies to benefit society.
Explore the many uses for nuclear science and its impact on energy, the environment, healthcare, food, and more.
Explore membership for yourself or for your organization.
Conference Spotlight
Nuclear Energy Conference & Expo (NECX)
September 8–11, 2025
Atlanta, GA|Atlanta Marriott Marquis
Standards Program
The Standards Committee is responsible for the development and maintenance of voluntary consensus standards that address the design, analysis, and operation of components, systems, and facilities related to the application of nuclear science and technology. Find out What’s New, check out the Standards Store, or Get Involved today!
Latest Magazine Issues
Jul 2025
Jan 2025
Latest Journal Issues
Nuclear Science and Engineering
August 2025
Nuclear Technology
Fusion Science and Technology
July 2025
Latest News
Hash Hashemian: Visionary leadership
As Dr. Hashem M. “Hash” Hashemian prepares to step into his term as President of the American Nuclear Society, he is clear that he wants to make the most of this unique moment.
A groundswell in public approval of nuclear is finding a home in growing governmental support that is backed by a tailwind of technological innovation. “Now is a good time to be in nuclear,” Hashemian said, as he explained the criticality of this moment and what he hoped to accomplish as president.
M. Gyulassy, S. T. Perkins
Nuclear Science and Engineering | Volume 53 | Number 4 | April 1974 | Pages 482-486
Technical Note | doi.org/10.13182/NSE74-A23380
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
The usual derived relations between the orbital angular momentum and the spin dependence of the unresolved resonance parameters are investigated and the basic underlying assumptions are compared to the most recent experimental data. However, because of the lack of p-wave data, only the assumptions pertaining to s-wave parameters can be verified. Furthermore, it is shown that a previously used level density expression between p() and p(,J) as used by some authors-assuming a (2J + 1) dependence—is in error.
