Disentangling effects of potential shape in the fission rate of heated nuclei

Abstract

We have compared the results of dynamical modeling of the fission process with predictions of the Kramers formulas. For the case of large dissipation, there are two of them: the integral rate R_I and its approximation R_O. As the ratio of the fission barrier height B_f to the temperature T reaches 4, any analytical rate is expected to agree with the dynamical quasistationary rate R_D within 2%. The latter has been obtained using numerical modeling with six different potentials. It has been found that the difference between R_O and R_D sometimes exceeds 20%. The features of the potentials used that are responsible for this disagreement are identified and studied. It is demonstrated that it is R _I, not R_O, that meets this expectation regardless of the potential used.

Original language	English
Article number	064606
Journal	Physical Review C - Nuclear Physics
Volume	82
Issue number	6
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.82.064606
Publication status	Published - 21 Dec 2010

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Nuclear and High Energy Physics

Access to Document

10.1103/PhysRevC.82.064606

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Disentangling effects of potential shape in the fission rate of heated nuclei'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this

@article{4462e202ed4b4174891ea293da24720a,

title = "Disentangling effects of potential shape in the fission rate of heated nuclei",

abstract = "We have compared the results of dynamical modeling of the fission process with predictions of the Kramers formulas. For the case of large dissipation, there are two of them: the integral rate RI and its approximation RO. As the ratio of the fission barrier height Bf to the temperature T reaches 4, any analytical rate is expected to agree with the dynamical quasistationary rate RD within 2%. The latter has been obtained using numerical modeling with six different potentials. It has been found that the difference between RO and RD sometimes exceeds 20%. The features of the potentials used that are responsible for this disagreement are identified and studied. It is demonstrated that it is R I, not RO, that meets this expectation regardless of the potential used.",

author = "Gontchar, {I. I.} and Chushnyakova, {Maria Vladimirovna} and Aktaev, {N. E.} and Litnevsky, {A. L.} and Pavlova, {E. G.}",

year = "2010",

month = dec,

day = "21",

doi = "10.1103/PhysRevC.82.064606",

language = "English",

volume = "82",

journal = "Physical Review C",

issn = "0556-2813",

publisher = "American Physical Society",

number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Disentangling effects of potential shape in the fission rate of heated nuclei

AU - Gontchar, I. I.

AU - Chushnyakova, Maria Vladimirovna

AU - Aktaev, N. E.

AU - Litnevsky, A. L.

AU - Pavlova, E. G.

PY - 2010/12/21

Y1 - 2010/12/21

N2 - We have compared the results of dynamical modeling of the fission process with predictions of the Kramers formulas. For the case of large dissipation, there are two of them: the integral rate RI and its approximation RO. As the ratio of the fission barrier height Bf to the temperature T reaches 4, any analytical rate is expected to agree with the dynamical quasistationary rate RD within 2%. The latter has been obtained using numerical modeling with six different potentials. It has been found that the difference between RO and RD sometimes exceeds 20%. The features of the potentials used that are responsible for this disagreement are identified and studied. It is demonstrated that it is R I, not RO, that meets this expectation regardless of the potential used.

AB - We have compared the results of dynamical modeling of the fission process with predictions of the Kramers formulas. For the case of large dissipation, there are two of them: the integral rate RI and its approximation RO. As the ratio of the fission barrier height Bf to the temperature T reaches 4, any analytical rate is expected to agree with the dynamical quasistationary rate RD within 2%. The latter has been obtained using numerical modeling with six different potentials. It has been found that the difference between RO and RD sometimes exceeds 20%. The features of the potentials used that are responsible for this disagreement are identified and studied. It is demonstrated that it is R I, not RO, that meets this expectation regardless of the potential used.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79251572632&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79251572632&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1103/PhysRevC.82.064606

DO - 10.1103/PhysRevC.82.064606

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:79251572632

VL - 82

JO - Physical Review C

JF - Physical Review C

SN - 0556-2813

IS - 6

M1 - 064606

ER -