Comparative studies for different proximity potentials applied to large cluster radioactivity of nuclei

The fusion cross section of $^{9}$Li + $^{70}$Zn reaction is studiedin an extensive manner within the framework of different theoreticalapproaches. For this purpose, three different methods which consistof proximity potentials, temperature dependent densities andtemperature dependent nuclear potentials are used in order todetermine the real part of the nuclear potential. The imaginary partis considered as Woods-Saxon potential. The calculated fusion crosssections are compared with the experimental data. The theoreticalresults describe the experimental data very well. It is seen thatthe applied approaches present to be different ways to study thereactions involving fusion cross sections.

show abstract

“…The only difference between Bass 80 and Bass 77 potentials is the function φ(s = r − R 1 − R 2 ), and is given by [32,34]…”

Section: Bass 1980 (Bass 80) Potentialmentioning

confidence: 99%

A comprehensive analysis of 9Li + 70Zn fusion cross section by using proximity potentials, temperature dependent density distributions and nuclear potentials

Aygun

Aygün

2019

Rev. Mex. Fís.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The difference between Bass 80 and Bass 77 potentials is the function ( = − 1 − 2 ) shown by [27,33] [38] is parametrized by [21] CW 76 N…”

Section: Bass 1980 (Bass 80) Potentialmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of Proximity Potentials on the Cross-Sections of 6,8He + 65Cu Halo Fusion Reactions

Aygun

2019

Ukr. J. Phys.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The comprehensive theoretical study is performed to determine the best proximity potentials in reproducing 6,8He + 65Cu fusion reactions. Twenty three different versions of proximity potentials that consist of Prox 66, Prox 76, Prox 77, Prox 79, Prox 81-I, Prox 81-II, Prox 81-III, Prox 84, Prox 88, Mod-Prox-88, Prox 95, Prox 2003-I, Prox 2003-II, Prox 2003-III, Prox 2010, BW 91, AW 95, Bass 73, Bass 77, Bass 80, CW 76, Ngo 80, and D are used. The theoretical results are compared with experimental data on 6,8He + 65Cu fusion reactions. The appropriate proximity potentials are determined.

show abstract

“…Bass 1980 (Bass 80) potential evaluated in theoretical calculations is exhibited by [8,14,15] Bass 80…”

Section: Bass 1980 (Bass 80) Potentialmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Comparison of Proximity Potentials in the Analysis of Heavy-Ion Elastic Cross Sections

Aygun

2018

Ukr. J. Phys.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To obtain alternative nuclear potentials is very important in explaining the heavy-ion reactions, as well as light-ion ones. For this purpose, a comprehensive analysis of six different proximity potentials ([1, 9–12, 15]) is performed for the first time in the present study. In order to see the availability of the potentials, the elastic-scattering angular distributions of 40Ca by different target nuclei from 32S to 208Pb are calculated within the framework of the optical model. The theoretical results are compared with each other and with experimental data. The similarities and differences of the potentials are discussed, and some alternative potentials are proposed.

show abstract

Comparative studies for different proximity potentials applied to large cluster radioactivity of nuclei

Cited by 42 publications

References 44 publications

A comprehensive analysis of 9Li + 70Zn fusion cross section by using proximity potentials, temperature dependent density distributions and nuclear potentials

A comprehensive analysis of 9Li + 70Zn fusion cross section by using proximity potentials, temperature dependent density distributions and nuclear potentials

Effects of Proximity Potentials on the Cross-Sections of 6,8He + 65Cu Halo Fusion Reactions

A Comparison of Proximity Potentials in the Analysis of Heavy-Ion Elastic Cross Sections

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About