<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mmultiscripts><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">H</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mprescripts /><mml:mrow /><mml:mrow><mml:mn>3</mml:mn></mml:mrow><mml:mrow /><mml:mrow /></mml:mmultiscripts></mml:mrow></mml:math>and<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mmultiscripts><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">He</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mprescripts /><mml:mrow /><mml:mrow><mml

Jl, Friar; Gibson, B. F.; Payne, G. L.

doi:10.1103/physrevc.37.2869

Cited by 26 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example using high precision NN potentials, able to fit NN scattering data up to an energy of 350 MeV with a χ 2 per datum close to 1, the 3 H, 3 He, and 4 He binding energies are underpredicted by about 1 and 4 MeV in the case of the threeand four-nucleon systems respectively [21]. A commonly accepted solution to this problem has been the introduction of TNF that could bridge the gap between the calculated binding energy [22,23] based on two-body interactions and the experimental binding energies. The origin of such a TNF lies in the fact that nucleons are treated as pointlike particles, disregarding therefore their internal quark structure.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative study of three-nucleon force models in nuclear matter

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We calculate the energy per particle of symmetric nuclear matter and pure neutron matter using the microscopic many-body Brueckner-Hartree-Fock (BHF) approach and employing the Argonne V18 (AV18) nucleon-nucleon (NN) potential supplemented with two different three-nucleon force models recently constructed to reproduce the binding energy of 3 H, 3 He, and 4 He nuclei as well as the neutron-deuteron doublet scattering length. We find that none of these new three-nucleon force models is able to reproduce simultaneously the empirical saturation point of symmetric nuclear matter and the properties of three-and four-nucleon systems.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative study of three-nucleon force models in nuclear matter

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…48 MeV, has been an outstanding problem in nuclear physics for a number of years [1]. A commonly accepted solution has been the introduction of a three-nucleon force that will bridge the gap between the calculated binding energy [2][3][4][5], based on a two-body interaction, and the experimental binding energy. The origin of such a three-body force is partly the result of the fact that the nucleons are treated as point particles interacting via a two-body meson exchange potential that is often assumed to be local.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Energy Dependence of the πN Amplitude and the Three-Nucleon Interaction

Saito

Afnan

1995

Few-Body Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

By calculating the contribution of the π − π three-body force to the threenucleon binding energy in terms of the πN amplitude using perturbation theory, we are able to determine the importance of the energy dependence and the contribution of the different partial waves of the πN amplitude to the three-nucleon force. A separable representation of the non-pole πN amplitude allows us to write the three-nucleon force in terms of the amplitude for N N → N N * , propagation of the N N N * system, and the amplitude for N N * → N N , with N * being the πN quasi-particle amplitude in a given state. The division of the πN amplitude into a pole and non-pole gives a procedure for the determination of the πN N form factor within the model. The total contribution of the three-body force to the binding energy of the triton for the separable approximation to the Paris nucleon-nucleon potential (PEST) is found to be very small mainly as a result of the energy dependence of the πN amplitude, the cancellation between the S-and P -wave πN amplitudes, and the soft πN N form factor.

show abstract

“…Rigorous Faddeev calculations, which solve the threebody problem exactly, are feasible and have actually been performed for the two Nijmengen potentials under discussion. The results are summarized in table 3: We see that the old Nijmegen potential [13] with a χ 2 /datum of 6.5 predicts 7.63 MeV [34] for the triton binding, while the new potential with a χ 2 /datum of 1.2 yields 7.66 MeV [35]. Thus, in spite of the seemingly very large differences on-shell in terms of the χ 2 , the difference in the nuclear structure quantity under consideration is negligibly small.…”

Section: On-shell Properties and Nuclear Structurementioning

confidence: 96%

Nucleon-nucleon potentials in comparison: Physics or polemics?

Machleidt¹,

1994

Physics Reports

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Guided by history, we review the major developments concerning realistic nucleon-nucleon (NN) potentials since the pioneering work by Kuo and Brown on the effective nuclear interaction. Our main emphasis is on the physics underlying various models for the NN interaction developed over the past quarter-century. We comment briefly on how to test the quantitative nature of nuclear potentials properly. A correct calculation (performed by independent researchers) of the χ 2 /datum for the fit of the world NN data yields 5.1, 3.7, and 1.9 for the Nijmegen, Paris, and Bonn potential, respectively. Finally, we also discuss in detail the relevance of the on-and off-shell properties of NN potentials for microscopic nuclear structure calculations.

show abstract

H3andHe

Cited by 26 publications

References 37 publications

Comparative study of three-nucleon force models in nuclear matter

Comparative study of three-nucleon force models in nuclear matter

Energy Dependence of the πN Amplitude and the Three-Nucleon Interaction

Nucleon-nucleon potentials in comparison: Physics or polemics?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About