### Abstract

We compare results of dynamical modeling of the fission process with predictions of the Kramers formulas. For the case of large dissipation these are two: the integral rate R_{I} and its approximation R_{O} . As the ratio of the fission barrier height B_{f} to the temperature T, ε, reaches 4, any analytical rate is expected to agree with the dynamical quasistationary value R_{D} within 2%. We perform modeling using several potentials and find that the difference between the R_{O} and the R_{D} sometimes exceeds 20% even for ε > 4. Such discrepancy is not acceptable nowadays because it is comparable to the quantum, non-markovian and multidimensional effects. The features of the potentials which cause this disagreement are identified and studied. It is demonstrated that this is the R_{I}, not the R_{O}, which meets the expectation above irrespectively of the potential profile.

Original language | English |
---|---|

Article number | 082023 |

Journal | Journal of Physics: Conference Series |

Volume | 312 |

Issue number | SECTION 8 |

DOIs | |

Publication status | Published - 2011 |

### Fingerprint

### ASJC Scopus subject areas

- Physics and Astronomy(all)

### Cite this

*Journal of Physics: Conference Series*,

*312*(SECTION 8), [082023]. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/312/8/082023

**Applying Kramers formula for the nuclear fission problem : How accurate is it?** / Gontchar, I. I.; Aktaev, N. E.; Litnevsky, A. L.; Pavlova, E. G.

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article

*Journal of Physics: Conference Series*, vol. 312, no. SECTION 8, 082023. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/312/8/082023

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Applying Kramers formula for the nuclear fission problem

T2 - How accurate is it?

AU - Gontchar, I. I.

AU - Aktaev, N. E.

AU - Litnevsky, A. L.

AU - Pavlova, E. G.

PY - 2011

Y1 - 2011

N2 - We compare results of dynamical modeling of the fission process with predictions of the Kramers formulas. For the case of large dissipation these are two: the integral rate RI and its approximation RO . As the ratio of the fission barrier height Bf to the temperature T, ε, reaches 4, any analytical rate is expected to agree with the dynamical quasistationary value RD within 2%. We perform modeling using several potentials and find that the difference between the RO and the RD sometimes exceeds 20% even for ε > 4. Such discrepancy is not acceptable nowadays because it is comparable to the quantum, non-markovian and multidimensional effects. The features of the potentials which cause this disagreement are identified and studied. It is demonstrated that this is the RI, not the RO, which meets the expectation above irrespectively of the potential profile.

AB - We compare results of dynamical modeling of the fission process with predictions of the Kramers formulas. For the case of large dissipation these are two: the integral rate RI and its approximation RO . As the ratio of the fission barrier height Bf to the temperature T, ε, reaches 4, any analytical rate is expected to agree with the dynamical quasistationary value RD within 2%. We perform modeling using several potentials and find that the difference between the RO and the RD sometimes exceeds 20% even for ε > 4. Such discrepancy is not acceptable nowadays because it is comparable to the quantum, non-markovian and multidimensional effects. The features of the potentials which cause this disagreement are identified and studied. It is demonstrated that this is the RI, not the RO, which meets the expectation above irrespectively of the potential profile.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=80455127400&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=80455127400&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1088/1742-6596/312/8/082023

DO - 10.1088/1742-6596/312/8/082023

M3 - Article

VL - 312

JO - Journal of Physics: Conference Series

JF - Journal of Physics: Conference Series

SN - 1742-6588

IS - SECTION 8

M1 - 082023

ER -