核反应中筛选问题的争议现状

Werner Däppen
{"title":"核反应中筛选问题的争议现状","authors":"Werner Däppen","doi":"arxiv-2409.09826","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A controversy about the possibility of dynamic effects in nuclear screening\nhas been around for several decades. On the one hand, there is the claim that\nthere are no dynamic effects, and that the classic Salpeter correction based on\nstatic Debye screening is all that is needed for astrophysical applications.\nThe size of the correction is on the order of 5% in typical solar fusion\nreactions. On the other hand, numerical simulations have shown that there is a\ndynamical effect, which essentially cancels the Salpeter correction. The\nresults of the numerical simulations were later independently confirmed. The\nastrophysical community, however, has so far largely ignored the possibility of\ndynamical screening. The present paper is meant to serve as a reminder of the\ncontroversy. Not only does the claim of an absence of a dynamical effect\nequally warrant an independent confirmation, but there is motivation for\nfurther investigation, such as the assessment of current laboratory experiments\nand a quantitative study of the dynamical effect in case it will turn out to be\nreal.","PeriodicalId":501573,"journal":{"name":"arXiv - PHYS - Nuclear Theory","volume":"95 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Current State of the Controversy over Screening in Nuclear Reactions\",\"authors\":\"Werner Däppen\",\"doi\":\"arxiv-2409.09826\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"A controversy about the possibility of dynamic effects in nuclear screening\\nhas been around for several decades. On the one hand, there is the claim that\\nthere are no dynamic effects, and that the classic Salpeter correction based on\\nstatic Debye screening is all that is needed for astrophysical applications.\\nThe size of the correction is on the order of 5% in typical solar fusion\\nreactions. On the other hand, numerical simulations have shown that there is a\\ndynamical effect, which essentially cancels the Salpeter correction. The\\nresults of the numerical simulations were later independently confirmed. The\\nastrophysical community, however, has so far largely ignored the possibility of\\ndynamical screening. The present paper is meant to serve as a reminder of the\\ncontroversy. Not only does the claim of an absence of a dynamical effect\\nequally warrant an independent confirmation, but there is motivation for\\nfurther investigation, such as the assessment of current laboratory experiments\\nand a quantitative study of the dynamical effect in case it will turn out to be\\nreal.\",\"PeriodicalId\":501573,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"arXiv - PHYS - Nuclear Theory\",\"volume\":\"95 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"arXiv - PHYS - Nuclear Theory\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/arxiv-2409.09826\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"arXiv - PHYS - Nuclear Theory","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/arxiv-2409.09826","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

关于核筛选中动态效应可能性的争论已经持续了几十年。一方面,有人声称不存在动态效应,在天体物理应用中只需要基于静态德拜筛选的经典 Salpeter 校正即可。另一方面,数值模拟表明,存在一种ynamical效应,它基本上可以抵消萨尔佩特校正。数值模拟的结果后来得到了独立证实。然而,迄今为止,天体物理学界在很大程度上忽视了动力学筛选的可能性。本文旨在提醒人们注意这一争论。不存在动力学效应的说法不仅需要得到独立的证实,而且还有进一步调查的动机,例如评估当前的实验室实验,以及对动力学效应进行定量研究,以防它被证明是真实的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The Current State of the Controversy over Screening in Nuclear Reactions
A controversy about the possibility of dynamic effects in nuclear screening has been around for several decades. On the one hand, there is the claim that there are no dynamic effects, and that the classic Salpeter correction based on static Debye screening is all that is needed for astrophysical applications. The size of the correction is on the order of 5% in typical solar fusion reactions. On the other hand, numerical simulations have shown that there is a dynamical effect, which essentially cancels the Salpeter correction. The results of the numerical simulations were later independently confirmed. The astrophysical community, however, has so far largely ignored the possibility of dynamical screening. The present paper is meant to serve as a reminder of the controversy. Not only does the claim of an absence of a dynamical effect equally warrant an independent confirmation, but there is motivation for further investigation, such as the assessment of current laboratory experiments and a quantitative study of the dynamical effect in case it will turn out to be real.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Quark saturation in the QCD phase diagram Quantum Magic and Multi-Partite Entanglement in the Structure of Nuclei Optimization of Nuclear Mass Models Using Algorithms and Neural Networks Far-from-equilibrium attractors with Full Relativistic Boltzmann approach in 3+1 D: moments of distribution function and anisotropic flows $v_n$ Photo-nuclear reaction rates of $^{157,159}$Ho and $^{163,165}$Tm and their impact in the $γ$--process
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1