4.5 Article

Dissecting reaction calculations using halo effective field theory and ab initio input

期刊

PHYSICAL REVIEW C
卷 98, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

AMER PHYSICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevC.98.034610

关键词

-

资金

  1. Institute for Nuclear Theory at the University of Washington
  2. Department of Energy
  3. European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme [654002]
  4. U.S. Department of Energy [DE-FG02-93ER40756]
  5. German Federal Ministry of Education and Research [05P15RDFN1]
  6. ExtreMe Matter Institute EMMI at the GSI Helmholtzzentrum fur Schwerionenphysik, Darmstadt, Germany
  7. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft within the Collaborative Research Center 1044
  8. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft within the Collaborative Research Center 1245
  9. PRISMA (Precision Physics, Fundamental Interactions and Structure of Matter) Cluster of Excellence
  10. State of Rhineland-Palatinate

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We present a description of the breakup of halo nuclei in peripheral nuclear reactions by coupling a model of the projectile motivated by halo effective field theory with a fully dynamical treatment of the reaction using the dynamical eikonal approximation. Our description of the halo system reproduces its long-range properties, i.e., binding energy and asymptotic normalization coefficients of bound states and phase shifts of continuum states. As an application we consider the breakup of Be-11 in collisions on Pb and C targets. Taking the input for our halo-EFT-inspired description of Be-11 from a recent ab initio calculation of that system yields a good description of the Coulomb-dominated breakup on Pb at energies up to about 2 MeV, with the result essentially independent of the short-distance part of the halo wave function. However, the nuclear dominated breakup on C is more sensitive to short-range physics. The role of spectroscopic factors and possible extensions of our approach to include additional short-range mechanisms are also discussed.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据