1993
DOI: 10.1103/physrevc.47.2043
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Angular momentum distributions forO16+144

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

2
5
0

Year Published

1993
1993
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 17 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 30 publications
2
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…[12] for the reactions 16 0 + 148 Sm and ^Ni + 100 Mo. It is shown that the model accounts well for the measured energy dependence of the average angular momentum in the 16 0 + 144 Nd and ^Ni + ^Zr reactions [14,15]. Employing the appropriate ^-distributions in the statistical model results in a good description of all features of the 160 Er* decay observed in the present work.…”
Section: Introductionsupporting
confidence: 52%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…[12] for the reactions 16 0 + 148 Sm and ^Ni + 100 Mo. It is shown that the model accounts well for the measured energy dependence of the average angular momentum in the 16 0 + 144 Nd and ^Ni + ^Zr reactions [14,15]. Employing the appropriate ^-distributions in the statistical model results in a good description of all features of the 160 Er* decay observed in the present work.…”
Section: Introductionsupporting
confidence: 52%
“…To avoid problems with consecutive unfoldings, which may not give unique solutions in the case of tails of distributions, we have opted for the following approach [11]. Through the use of a fusion model we produce compound nu cleus spin distributions (σ^) with parameters adjusted to fit measured fusion excitation functions for both reactions [14,15]. In the subsequent statistical model calculations, the entry-state (E*,I), and the (E*,M 7 ) distributions of each residue are obtained.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Prior to the introduction of the concept of the experimental barrier distribution and the first measured distributions, fusion excitation functions were thought to be smooth and featureless curves, providing a poor test of theoretical models (136,137). Since then, it has been demonstrated that in fact fusion excitation functions exhibit subtle structure that carries unique information on the interactions of the two nuclei at the fusion barrier.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Such data yield poorly defined barrier distributions [15,16j and can therefore be equally well reproduced with models incorporating very different barrier distributions. Analyses of such data gave rise to a generally accepted belief that fusion excitation functions are smooth and featureless and do not provide a good test of models [17,18].When the cross sections have high precision (typically =~1 %) and are measured in small, precisely determined energy steps, the barrier distributions are well defined and they place more stringent limits on any models used.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%