Die Störung der 4p 2 P‐Terme durch Komplexterme im Kupfer I‐Spektrum. II

Refined values of the hyperfine constants A (4 p 2 P 1/2 ) and A (4 p 2 P 3/2 ) as well as B (4 p 2 P 3/2 ) required a new analysis of the perturbation of the 3 d 10 4 p 2 P ‐levels by the [3 d 9 (4 s 4 p ) 1 P ] 2 P ‐ and [3 d 9 (4 s 4 p ) 2 P ] 2 P ‐levels in Cu I‐spectrum. The improved amplitudes α, β, γ referring to these three states are \documentclass{article}\pagestyle{empty}\begin{document}$ \sqrt{0,969}\,(\sqrt{0,979}),\, \pm \sqrt{0021\,}(\pm\sqrt{0,018}),\, \mp\sqrt{0,010\,}(\mp\sqrt{0,007}). $\end{document} . The values in brackets coming from part I of this publication are out of date now. The phases of the amplitudes β, Γ with respect to α cannot be ascertained from the magnetic hyperfine constants because of the absence of interfering matrix elements between 3 d 10 4 p ‐ and 3 d 9 4 s 4 p ‐ states. But the upper choice of phases turns out to be the right one if one deduces from α, β, γ the Slater parameters of the perturbation. One finds J = R 2 (3 d 4 p , 4 s 4 p )/5 = 1431 cm −1 and K = R 1 (3 d 4 p , 4 p 4 s )/3 = 2609 cm −1 . Unfortunately the values J = 1882 cm −1 , K = 1077 cm −1 quoted by B UDICK and L EVIN are wrong. They have been deduced from an energy matrix wich was not phase consistent with the basis of magnetic hyperfine constants given in a former paper of the author and used throughout part I of this publication.