Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Access by Xinjiang University

Exploration of the energy dependence of proton nonlocal optical potentials

M. I. Jaghoub1,2, A. E. Lovell1,3,4,5, and F. M. Nunes1,3,*

  • 1National Superconducting Cyclotron Laboratory, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan 48824, USA
  • 2Physics Department, The University of Jordan, 11942 Amman, Jordan
  • 3Department of Physics and Astronomy, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan 48824, USA
  • 4Theoretical Division, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico 87545, USA
  • 5Center for Nonlinear Studies, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico 87545, USA

  • *nunes@nscl.msu.edu

Phys. Rev. C 98, 024609 – Published 10 August, 2018

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.98.024609

Abstract

Background: Given the importance of including nonlocality in the effective interactions in reaction models, a recent phenomenological study focusing on neutron-target nonlocal optical potentials suggests the need for the inclusion of explicit energy dependence [Lovell et al., Phys. Rev. C 96, 051601 (2017)].

Purpose: In this work, we inspect whether the same is true for proton nonlocal optical potentials.

Method: Similarly to the earlier work, we perform a χ2 analysis of proton elastic scattering data on Ca40, Zr90, and Pb208 at energies of E1045 MeV, assuming the Tian, Pang, and Ma nonlocal form for the optical potential. We introduce energy and asymmetry dependencies in the imaginary part of the potential and refit the data to obtain a global parametrization.

Results: No matter which starting point is used, or whether we include backward angles in the fitting procedure, our results show the emergence of a strong energy dependence in the potential. We also show that while our parametrization represents only a modest improvement over the original energy-independent potential for those cases included in the fit, our new energy-dependent potential extrapolates much better for nuclei not included in the fit and for energies above those included.

Conclusions: As for the neutron case, we conclude that nonlocality alone cannot provide a complete description of proton elastic scattering data and that a significant energy dependence is required.

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (52)

  1. H. Feshbach, Ann. Phys. (NY) 5, 357 (1958).
  2. H. Feshbach, Ann. Phys. (NY) 19, 287 (1962).
  3. W. Dickhoff and D. Van Neck, Many-Body Theory Exposed!, 2nd ed. (World Scientific, Singapore, 2008).
  4. F. Perey and B. Buck, Nucl. Phys. 32, 353 (1962).
  5. L. G. Arnold, Phys. Rev. Lett. 26, 1263 (1971).
  6. P. Fraser, K. Amos, S. Karataglidis, L. Canton, G. Pisent, and J. P. Svenne, Eur. Phys. J. A 35, 69 (2008).
  7. M. H. Mahzoon, R. J. Charity, W. H. Dickhoff, H. Dussan, and S. J. Waldecker, Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 162503 (2014).
  8. G. H. Rawitscher and D. Lukaszek, Phys. Rev. C 69, 044608 (2004).
  9. M. I. Jaghoub, M. F. Hassan, and G. H. Rawitscher, Phys. Rev. C 84, 034618 (2011).
  10. R. Varner, W. Thompson, T. McAbee, E. Ludwig, and T. Clegg, Phys. Rep. 201, 57 (1991).
  11. A. Koning and J. Delaroche, Nucl. Phys. A 713, 231 (2003).
  12. L. J. Titus and F. M. Nunes, Phys. Rev. C 89, 034609 (2014).
  13. A. Ross, L. J. Titus, F. M. Nunes, M. H. Mahzoon, W. H. Dickhoff, and R. J. Charity, Phys. Rev. C 92, 044607 (2015).
  14. L. J. Titus, F. M. Nunes, and G. Potel, Phys. Rev. C 93, 014604 (2016).
  15. A. Ross, L. J. Titus, and F. M. Nunes, Phys. Rev. C 94, 014607 (2016).
  16. N. K. Timofeyuk and R. C. Johnson, Phys. Rev. C 87, 064610 (2013).
  17. S. J. Waldecker and N. K. Timofeyuk, Phys. Rev. C 94, 034609 (2016).
  18. G. W. Bailey, N. K. Timofeyuk, and J. A. Tostevin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 162502 (2016).
  19. P. J. Dortmans, K. Amos, S. Karataglidis, and S. Raynal, Phys. Rev. C 58, 2249 (1998).
  20. P. K. Deb, K. Amos, and S. Karataglidis, Phys. Rev. C 62, 037601 (2000).
  21. J. Rotureau, P. Danielewicz, G. Hagen, F. M. Nunes, and T. Papenbrock, Phys. Rev. C 95, 024315 (2017).
  22. A. Kumar, R. Kanungo, A. Calci, P. Navrátil, A. Sanetullaev, M. Alcorta, V. Bildstein, G. Christian, B. Davids, J. Dohet-Eraly et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 262502 (2017).
  23. A. E. Lovell, P.-L. Bacq, P. Capel, F. M. Nunes, and L. J. Titus, Phys. Rev. C 96, 051601 (2017).
  24. Y. Tian, D.-Y. Pang, and Z.-Y. Ma, Int. J. Mod. Phys. E 24, 1550006 (2015).
  25. K. Amos, P. J. Dortmans, H. V. von Geramb, S. Karataglidis, and J. Raynnal, Nucleon-Nucleus Scattering: A Microscopic Nonrelativistic Approach (Springer US, Boston, 2002), pp. 276–536.
  26. J. F. Dicello, G. Igo, W. T. Leland, and F. G. Perey, Phys. Rev. C 4, 1130 (1971).
  27. R. H. McCamis, T. N. Nasr, J. Birchall, N. E. Davison, W. T. H. van Oers, P. J. T. Verheijen, R. F. Carlson, A. J. Cox, B. C. Clark, E. D. Cooper et al., Phys. Rev. C 33, 1624 (1986).
  28. A. F. Gurbich and N. N. Titarenko, Vop. At. Nauki i Tekhn., Ser. Yadernye Konstanty, 142 (1996).
  29. J. K. Dickens, E. Eichler, and G. R. Satchler, Phys. Rev. 168, 1355 (1968).
  30. J. B. Ball, C. B. Fulmer, and R. H. Bassel, Phys. Rev. 135, B706 (1964).
  31. R. de Swiniarski, D.-L. Pham, and G. Bagieu, Can. J. Phys. 55, 43 (1977).
  32. L. N. Blumberg, E. E. Gross, A. Van Der Woude, A. Zucker, and R. H. Bassel, Phys. Rev. 147, 812 (1966).
  33. R.Varner, Ph.D. thesis, Duke University, Durham, NC, 1986.
  34. W. T. H. van Oers, H. Haw, N. E. Davison, A. Ingemarsson, B. Fagerström, and G. Tibell, Phys. Rev. C 10, 307 (1974).
  35. L. Titus, A. Ross, and F. Nunes, Comput. Phys. Commun. 207, 499 (2016).
  36. I. J. Thompson, Comput. Phys. Rep. 7, 167 (1988).
  37. A. E. Lovell, F. M. Nunes, J. Sarich, and S. M. Wild, Phys. Rev. C 95, 024611 (2017).
  38. F. D. Becchetti and G. W. Greenlees, Phys. Rev. 182, 1190 (1969).
  39. S. Kato, K. Okada, M. Kondo, K. Hosono, T. Saito, N. Matsuoka, K. Hatanaka, T. Noro, S. Nagamachi, H. Shimizu et al., Phys. Rev. C 31, 1616 (1985).
  40. W. H. L. Moonen, J. H. A. M. Krabbenborg, H. P. Offermans, J. F. A. G. Ruyl, P. J. van Hall, S. S. Klein, G. J. Nijgh, C. W. A. M. van Overveld, R. M. A. L. Petit, and O. J. Poppema, J. Phys. G: Nucl. Part. Phys. 19, 1191 (1993).
  41. W. Tait, E. Burge, and V. Edwards, Nucl. Phys. A 176, 390 (1971).
  42. H. S. Liers, R. N. Boyd, C. H. Poppe, J. A. Sievers, and D. L. Watson, Phys. Rev. C 2, 1399 (1970).
  43. C. B. Fulmer, J. B. Ball, A. Scott, and M. L. Whiten, Phys. Rev. 181, 1565 (1969).
  44. J. Melssen, P. V. Hall, S. Wassenaar, O. Poppema, G. Nijgh, and S. Klein, Nucl. Phys. A 376, 183 (1982).
  45. G. Mani, D. Jones, and D. Jacques, Nucl. Phys. A 165, 384 (1971).
  46. H. Sakaguchi, M. Nakamura, K. Hatanaka, A. Goto, T. Noro, F. Ohtani, H. Sakamoto, and S. Kobayashi, Phys. Lett. B 89, 40 (1979).
  47. H. F. Lutz, D. W. Heikkinen, and W. Bartolini, Phys. Rev. C 4, 934 (1971).
  48. B. Sinha, V. Edwards, E. Burge, and W. Tait, Nucl. Phys. A 183, 401 (1972).
  49. H. Sakaguchi, M. Nakamura, K. Hatanaka, A. Goto, T. Noro, F. Ohtani, H. Sakamoto, H. Ogawa, and S. Kobayashi, Phys. Rev. C 26, 944 (1982).
  50. Y. Aoki, H. Iida, K. Hashimoto, K. Nagano, M. Takei, Y. Toba, and K. Yagi, Nucl. Phys. A 394, 413 (1983).
  51. M. Koike, T. Suehiro, K. Pingel, K. Komura, I. Nonaka, T. Wada, T. Fujisawa, H. Kamitsubo, and T. Nojiri, Nucl. Phys. A 248, 237 (1975).
  52. C. Mahaux and R. Sartor, in Advances in Nuclear Physics, Vol. 20, edited by J. Negele and E. Vogt (Springer US, Boston, 1991), pp. 1–223.

Outline

Information

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation