Consistent mean-field description of the<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><mml:mmultiscripts><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">C</mml:mi><mml:mprescripts/><mml:none/><mml:mrow><mml:mn>12</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:mmultiscripts><mml:mo> </mml:mo><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mo> </mml:mo><mml:mmultiscripts><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">C</mml:mi><mml:mprescripts/><mml:none/><mml:mrow><mml:mn>12</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:mmultiscripts></mml:math>optical potential at low energies and the astrophysical

Chien, Le Hoang; Khoa, Dao T.; Cuong, Do Cong; Phuc, Nguyen Hoang

doi:10.1103/physrevc.98.064604

Cited by 23 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 75 publications

(214 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The former approach is applied for calculating the potential 𝑈 𝑛 in Refs. [7][8][9][10][11] whereas others prefer the Migdal NN-interaction [12][13][14][15][16]. Only recently the potentials 𝑈 𝑛 resulting from these two kinds of NNforces have been compared in detail for the case of spherical colliding nuclei [17,18].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Above-barrier heavy-ion fusion cross-sections using the relativistic mean-field approach: Case of spherical colliding nuclei

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the present work, the influence of the nuclear matter density on the DF potential and on the Coulomb barrier parameters is studied systematically for collisions of spherical nuclei. The value of the parameter = ( 1 3 ⁄ + 1 3 ⁄ ) ⁄ (estimating the Coulomb barrier height) varies in these calculations from 10 MeV up to 150 MeV. We have introduced self-consistent relativistic mean field (RMF) density in the present analysis. For the nucleon-nucleon effective interaction, the M3Y forces with the finite range exchange term and density dependence are employed. The above barrier fusion cross sections are calculated within the framework of the trajectory model with surface friction. Results are compared with the previous study in which the nuclear density came from the Skyrme Hartree-Fock (HF) calculations and with the high precision experimental data. This comparison demonstrates that i) agreement between the theoretical and experimental cross sections obtained with RMF and HF densities is of the same quality and ii) the values of the only adjustable parameter (friction strength) obtained with RMF and HF densities strongly correlate with each other.where is the mass number and ( ⊥ , ) is the deformed density. The total binding energy and other observables are also obtained by using the standard relations, given in Ref. [50]. We apply the widely used NL3 [54] interaction parameter set for the present analysis. It is worth mentioning that the interaction parameters are able to describe the bulk properties of the nuclei reasonably good from the β-stable region to the drip-line [35,38,42,[44][45][46][47]. To deal with the open-shell nuclei, one has to consider the pairing correlations in their ground as well as excited states [33,35,38,42,[44][45][46][47]. The constant gap BCS approach is adopted for the present study and more details of the paring can be found in Ref. [31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40][42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50][51][52][53][54]. The trajectory fluctuation-dissipation model Dynamical equations and cross-sectionsThe physical picture of our dynamical model is similar to that of Ref.[55] the detail description of the model can be found in [22]. The fictitious particle with the reduced mass runs experiencing the action of the conservative, dissipative, and random (fluctuating)

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Above-barrier heavy-ion fusion cross-sections using the relativistic mean-field approach: Case of spherical colliding nuclei

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The reader is referred to e.g. [344,345,346,347,348,349] for recent studies 8 . There are prospects to measure the 12 C + 12 C fusion cross section down to energies close to the effective stellar energy E 0 in underground experiments.…”

Section: The He To Si Burningsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Astronuclear Physics: A tale of the atomic nuclei in the skies

Arnould

Goriely

2020

Progress in Particle and Nuclear Physics

111

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A century ago, nuclear physics entered astrophysics, giving birth to a new field of science referred to as "Nuclear Astrophysics". With time, it developed at an impressive pace into a vastly inter-and multidisciplinary discipline bringing into its wake not only astronomy and cosmology, but also many other sub-fields of physics, especially particle, solid-state and computational physics, as well as chemistry, geology and even biology. The present Astronuclear Physics review focusses primarily on the facets of nuclear physics that are of relevance to astronomy and astrophysics, the theoretical aspects being of special concern here. The observational aspects of astronomy and astrophysics that may have some connection to nuclear physics are only broadly reviewed, mainly through the provision of recent relevant references. Multi-messenger astronomy has developed most remarkably during the last decades, with often direct implications for nuclear astrophysics. The electromagnetic view of the components of the Universe has improved dramatically at all wavelengths, from the γ-ray to the radio domains, providing important new information on the Big Bang and the properties of stars. Neutrino astronomy has made giant steps forward. In particular, the famed "solar neutrino problem" is now behind us. The long-sought gravitational waves have at last been detected, with direct relevance namely to the merger of compact stars. The composition of Galactic Cosmic Rays and stellar/solar energetic particles is better known than ever, providing constrains on the GCR physics.On the stellar modeling side, we broadly brush the progress that has been made based on new observations, and even more so on the spectacular increase in computer capabilities. We briefly outline recent advances regarding the quiescent evolution of stars, as well as the eventual catastrophic supernova explosion of certain classes of them. In spite of significant improvements in the simulations, many long-standing problems still await solid solutions, particularly regarding the details and robustness of explosion simulations. In fact, new questions are continuously emerging, and new facts may endanger old ideas.The lion's share of this review concerns the nuclear physics phenomena that may be at work in astrophysical conditions, with a strong focus on theory. Exceptionally large varieties of nuclei have to be dealt with, ranging from the lightest to the heaviest ones, from the valley of nuclear stability all the way to the proton and neutron drip lines. An additional serious difficulty comes from the fact that the nuclei are immersed in highly unusual environments which may have a significant impact on their static properties, the diversity of their transmutation modes, some of which not being observable in the laboratory, and on the probabilities of these modes. The description of nuclei as individual entities has even to be replaced by the construction of an Equation of State at high enough temperatures and/or densities prevailing in the cores of exploding stars an...

show abstract

“…However, the description of deep sub-barrier resonances is challenging and demanding. The primary reaction channels, 12 C( 12 C, α) 20 Ne and 12 C( 12 C, p) 23 Na, involve the rearrangement of many nucleons and the strong channel coupling. To mimic such complex reaction dynamics, nuclear models usually adopt phenomenological potentials [20][21][22][23], undermining their predictability at low energy.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The primary reaction channels, 12 C( 12 C, α) 20 Ne and 12 C( 12 C, p) 23 Na, involve the rearrangement of many nucleons and the strong channel coupling. To mimic such complex reaction dynamics, nuclear models usually adopt phenomenological potentials [20][21][22][23], undermining their predictability at low energy. In principle, full-microscopic nuclear models without phenomenologically adjustable parameters can overcome this problem [24], but the resonant contributions have never been taken into account.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…where the ket is the resonance wave function, while the bra is the channel wave function decaying into two nuclei with masses A 1 and A 2 separated by the distance a with the orbital angular momentum l. We consider four decay channels, p + 23 Na(3/2 + 1 ), p + 23 Na * (5/2 + 1 ), α + 20 Ne(0 + 1 ) and α + 20 Ne * (2 + 1 ) which are denoted by p 0 , p 1 , α 0 and α 1 , respectively. The wave functions of α, 20 Ne, and 23 Na are also calculated by AMD. For the later use, the RWAs are given as the ratio to the Wigner limit,…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

$\mathbf{{}^{12}{C} + {}^{12}{C}}$ Fusion $\boldsymbol{S^*}$-factor from a Full-microscopic Nuclear Model

Taniguchi,

Kimura

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Consistent mean-field description of theC12 + C12optical potential at low energies and the astrophysical

Cited by 23 publications

References 75 publications

Above-barrier heavy-ion fusion cross-sections using the relativistic mean-field approach: Case of spherical colliding nuclei

Above-barrier heavy-ion fusion cross-sections using the relativistic mean-field approach: Case of spherical colliding nuclei

Astronuclear Physics: A tale of the atomic nuclei in the skies

$\mathbf{{}^{12}{C} + {}^{12}{C}}$ Fusion $\boldsymbol{S^*}$-factor from a Full-microscopic Nuclear Model

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About