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
2025 ANS Winter Conference & Expo
November 8–12, 2025
Washington, DC|Washington Hilton
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
Nov 2025
Jul 2025
Latest Journal Issues
Nuclear Science and Engineering
December 2025
Nuclear Technology
November 2025
Fusion Science and Technology
Latest News
From renaissance to reality: Infrastructure for a global nuclear fuel cycle
Dale Klein
This article was adapted from the author’s speech during a plenary at the 21st International Symposium on the Packaging and Transportation of Radioactive Materials (PATRAM 2025), San Antonio, Texas, July 2025.
There has been a lot of discussion lately about reforming the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. But I want to be clear: When it comes to nuclear safety and security, there is no place for partisan politics. I support efforts to streamline regulatory processes, but the independence and integrity of the NRC must remain sacrosanct. If we are serious about expanding nuclear power and reclaiming our global leadership in nuclear technology, having a strong independent regulator is fundamental.
Right now, we’re on the edge of a global nuclear resurgence driven by rising demand from data centers, growing concerns about energy security, and the need to decarbonize industry.
G. P. Ford
Nuclear Science and Engineering | Volume 66 | Number 3 | June 1978 | Pages 334-348
Technical Paper | doi.org/10.13182/NSE78-A27216
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
Nuclear state and level densities as a function of excitation energy, angular momentum, and parity have been calculated by a combinatorial method for 56Fe, 59Co, 60Ni, 61Cu, 62Ni, 63Cu, and 65Cu. Single-particle states for both Woods-Saxon and Nilsson potentials were used. These calculations were done with zero and nonzero pairing energy. State densities as a function of excitation energy have been calculated by an approximate inversion of exact partition functions; they agree well with state densities calculated by the combinatorial method. Average excitation energy as a function of temperature has been calculated from the partition function for each of the nuclei. Level densities as a function of energy, calculated by the combinatorial method, are compared with measured level densities. The agreement is either good or very good for most, but not all, of the nuclei. No evidence was found that must be interpreted as indicating a failure of the independent-particle model at higher excitation energies. For level density calculations with zero pairing energy, there is a suggestion, but no clear indication, that Woods-Saxon single-particle states are better than Nilsson single-particle states. Calculated and measured spin cutoff parameters are compared for 56Fe and 61Cu. Single-particle states for Nilsson-type potentials tend to give higher state and level densities than single-particle states for Woods-Saxon-type potentials. This tendency is not due to the larger number of single-particle states for Nilsson-type potentials, and it can be compensated for by using a nonzero pairing energy. The calculated fraction of negative-parity states is about one-half as expected, but this fraction varies much more than expected from one energy interval to another. The calculated M-value distribution is approximately Gaussian as expected.