Physics Letters B 282 (1992 ) 276-280

North-Holland PHYSICS LETTERS B

Neutron flow and necking in heavy-ion fusion reactions

N. R o w l e y ", I.J. T h o m p s o n b a n d M . A . N a g a r a j a n "
a SERCDaresburyLaboratory, Daresbury, Warrington WA4 4AD, UK
b Departmentof Physics, UniversityofSurrey, Guildford, SurreyGU2 5XH, UK

Received 21 January 1992; revised manuscript received 25 March 1992

The "barrier distributions" arising from neutron transfer channels are discussed. It is shown that sequential transfers can lead
to the broad distributions characteristic of many experimental fusion cross sections. Finite Q-value effects can lead to neutron
flow and a build up of a neck between the colliding nuclei. "Anti-necking" may also occur.

Recently, it was suggested by Stelson [ 1 ] that the

experimental sub-barrier fusion cross sections in a
large n u m b e r o f systems could be explained i f one as-
sumes a distribution o f barriers D ( B ) , where b is the
barrier height, and where the fusion cross section is
defined by
oo
a ( E ) = f a(E, B ) D ( B ) d B .
0 view o f course eq. ( 1 ) should use the single-barrier
In this equation D ( B ) is normalised to unity and the
quantity a(E, B) is the classical fusion cross section
defined by
Etr(E,B)=nR2(E-B), ifE>~B,
=0, if E <~B .
In many cases, Stelson o b t a i n e d a flat barrier distri-
b u t i o n extending from a threshold BI to some maxi-
m u m value and he suggested that the threshold en-
ergy was correlated with neutron flow between the two
nuclei. It is this p h e n o m e n o n which we wish to inves-
tigate here in a microscopic framework o f coupled-
channels equations.
It was recently shown by Rowley, Satchler and
Stelson [2] that one could take barrier penetration
effects into account and extract the barrier distribu-
tions directly from the second derivative o f the prod-
uct of the energy and the e x p e r i m e n t a l fusion cross
sections:
(d eo(e)- l =7tR2D(B) (3)
The barrier distribution D ( B ) o f e q . ( 3 ) , is the same
as the continuous D ( B ) defined by Stelson in the
sense that when inserted in eq. ( 1 ) along with the
classical expression (2), it yields the experimental
(1) cross section. F r o m a q u a n t u m mechanical point o f
fusion cross section o f Wong [ 3 ], which correctly ac-
counts for barrier penetration (tunneling) effects.
Rowley et al. showed that the quantity defined by eq.
( 3 ) m a y then be related to some underlying discrete
distribution o f eigenchannel barriers s m o o t h e d out
(2) over an energy o f a r o u n d 0.56 ha) ( ~ 2 M e V ) , where
w is the frequency related to the curvature o f the bar-
rier top. This underlying discrete distribution will,
therefore, still be visible in D ( B ) if the i n d i v i d u a l ei-
genchannel barriers are separated by more than about
2 MeV. F o r a complex system o f transfer channels, it
would be impossible to derive eigenchannels analyt-
ically but we shall see below that the application o f
eq. ( 3 ) will enable us to see the underlying d y n a m i c s
in a transparent way.
The nature o f the barrier distributions expected
from strong coupling o f the elastic channel to rota-
tional excitations [ 4] and vibrational excitations [5 ]
has been discussed in the literature. In the case o f fu-
sion o f rotational nuclei, one expects an a s y m m e t r i c
barrier distribution and recent accurate data on the

276 0370-2693/92/$ 05.00 © 1992 Elsevier Science Publishers B.V. All rights reserved.
Volume 282, number 3,4 PHYSICS LETTERS B
system 160 + 154Smhas been able to confirm this [ 6 ].
In the case of vibrational nuclei, model calculations
for the system 160-t-92Zr suggest that one should ex-
pect a barrier distribution in which there is a split be-
tween barriers below the conventional Coulomb bar-
rier and one which occurs well above it, the splitting
depending upon the collectivity of the vibration [ 7 ].
Neither of the above distributions resembles the em-
pirical fiat ones extracted by Stelson [1] for some
systems. However, he suggested a correlation be-
tween the threshold of his barrier distribution and the
nuclear separation at which neutron flow would be-
come classically allowed. Hence, these fiat distribu-
tions are more likely to be associated with coupling
to transfer channels. In order to prove that this kind
of strong coupling can indeed produce such distribu-
tions, we consider a model calculation of neutron
transfer in the ~60+ ~70 system. Since we have sev-
eral effects which we wish to describe, we shall per-
form a series o f model calculations for this system
with no particular regard for the physical values of
the parameters. We shall for example vary the num-
ber of channels, their nature (simultaneous/sequen-
tial) and their Q-values and shall take a spectro-
scopic factor for which coupling to the transfer
channels is strong. Although any particular set of pa-
rameters may be unphysical for this system, they will
be representative of conditions prevailing in other
systems and a comparison o f the various effects is
simpler if they are all generated within the same
system.
The real part of the optical potential (assumed to
have a Woods-Saxon shape) was chosen to have ( V,
ro, a ) = ( 6 0 . 5 MeV, 1.18 fm, 0.66 fm). The imagi-
nary part of the optical potential (assumed to have a
Woods-Saxon squared shape) had parameters ( 10.0
MeV, 1.00 fm, 0.40 fm). The latter radius and dif-
fuseness parameters are sufficiently small for this po-
tential to be negligible in the barrier region and thus
our results will be the same as if we had employed an
ingoing-wave boundary condition. The neutron was
bound in a potential ( 53.5 MeV, 1.2 fm, 0.6 fm) giv-
ing a binding energy of 2.0 MeV, and was transferred
with a spectroscopic amplitude o f 2. This binding en-
ergy and amplitude have half and twice their physical
values respectively. Both of these choices serve to en-
hance the effect of transfer and thus simulate other
systems where the effects are strong.
28 May 1992
We shall simplify our problem by ignoring the spin
of the neutron but in all other respects shall treat the
transfer process exactly using the code FRESCO [ 8 ].
Thus our calculations will use none of the approxi-
mations of some earlier treatments [9] which as-
sumed that the transfers could be treated as effective
inelastic channels (with the further assumption of
constant coupling form factors i.e. independent of r).
The true couplings are not only r-dependent but are
of course non-local for transfers. T h u s any eigen-
channel structure will also correspond to non-local
channel potentials. We shall see, however, that struc-
ture is still manifest.
Two separate classes of calculations were per-
formed. In the first case we assumed a number of sin-
gle-neutron transfer channels and allowed all o f these
to couple to the elastic channel but not to each other.
The coupling scheme is shown schematically in fig.
l a, where we also show the corresponding "sche-
matic" coupling matrix. The Q values for all the
transfer channels were set equal to zero. The barrier
distribution was extracted, using eq. (3), from the
calculated cross sections, and is shown in fig. 2a for
various numbers of channels. The single-bump curve
corresponds to elastic scattering with no coupling.
Once transfer channels are introduced, it can be seen
that, independent of their number, the barrier distri-
butions show two peaks. This can be easily under-
stood from the structure of the schematic coupling
matrix since one can reduce the coupled equations to
two, describing the coupling of the elastic to a single
linear superposition of transfer channels with an ef-
fective strength. The effect o f increasing the number
of channels is merely to separate the two barriers fur-
ther. This case (which we refer to as simultaneous
transfer) resembles the case o f vibrational coupling.
If one allows finite Q-values, the barrier distribution
will be expected to exhibit still the two barriers but
the relative strengths will be modified (see below).
The second set of calculations represent a multi-
nucleon transfer model. We considered a single-neu-
tron transfer channel to be coupled to the elastic
channel. A two-neutron transfer channel was intro-
duced and it was assumed that this channel was cou-
pled to the single-neutron transfer channel but was
not coupled directly to the elastic channel. We then
introduced a three-neutron transfer channel which
was coupled to the two-neutron transfer channel and
277
Volume 282, number 3,4 PHYSICS LETTERS B
(a) Simultaneous
n=4
n=2
A A+I
(o:ov) V
V
•
0
-Q
•
Fig. 1. (a) The levels involved in "simultaneous" transfer of a single neutron to the ground state and various excited states of the target
or projectile are shown. The schematic coupling matrix for this type of process is also given. (b) As (a) but for the case of sequential
transfers of several neutrons.
so on. Fig. l b shows the coupling scheme ( a n d the
" s c h e m a t i c " coupling m a t r i x ) utilised in this model.
F o r the sake o f simplicity we assumed the coupling
to be the same at each step. We first set all the Q val-
ues to zero and evaluated the barrier distribution as
we included more channels. The resulting distribu-
tions are shown in fig. 2b for n = 3 and 5. (The curves
for n = 1 and 2 are the same as for the simultaneous
case). As the n u m b e r o f "sequential" transfer chan-
nels is increased, the separate contributions are seen
to overlap and the barrier distribution becomes rather
fiat. The resulting function for five channels, for ex-
ample, resembles closely the shape which Stelson [ 1 ]
often found necessary to describe heavy-ion fusion
cross sections.
Stelson had also speculated that the threshold o f
this distribution corresponded to the p o i n t at which
neutrons started to "flow" freely from one potential
well to the other. In o r d e r to test this idea, we have
calculated the neutron density between the two col-
liding nuclei at an energy corresponding to the lower
barrier in the case o f simultaneous transfer (fig. 2a)
a n d c o m p a r e d with that at the higher barrier. At the
lower energy the higher barrier is "filtered" out by
the reduced penetration probability, and the proper-
ties we calculate there relate solely to the effective
"eigenchannel" corresponding to the lower barrier.
We find that the neutron density is four times larger
278
28 May 1992
(b) Sequential •
n=3
A+2
J A+I
A
(ov o)V -O
0 V
V
-Q
than it would be if the transfer channels were
" s w i t c h e d " off. In other words, the neutron is equally
associated with either core and the two related wave-
functions a d d in phase in the regioia between the nu-
clei. At the higher energy both channels contribute to
the fusion in equal measure and we find that the neu-
tron density is now only about twice what it would be
without coupling. Since this is precisely what one
would expect from a 50% contribution o f the lower
eigenchannel (which has a four-fold increase in den-
sity), it is clear that the neutron density between the
nuclei practically vanishes for the higher eigenchan-
nel configuration. (A m o r e complete calculation o f
such a system by Imanishi and von Oertzen [ 10 ] us-
ing a molecular orbital a p p r o a c h yields similar re-
suits for the two eigenchannel barriers. They refer to
the density distributions corresponding to the low
energy and high energy barriers as the covalent and
the anti-covalent molecular types. )
One is t e m p t e d to interpret the above result in
terms o f some kind o f d y n a m i c a l neutron flow be-
tween the two nuclei in the lower eigenchannel. This
would, however, be incorrect since in the adiabatic
limit the neutron wavefunction is " f r o z e n " and the
two different configurations one sees merely corre-
spond to the wavefunctions with respect to the two
different cores adding either in phase or out o f phase
in the simultaneous transfer case. In the sequential
Volume 282, number 3,4 PHYSICS LETTERS B 28 May 1992

a) Simultaneous Q~0
a) Simultaneous ./" ". 600 / '~ n=2
600 /
/ ': n=l ,

LIJ
400 / '1,
400
"0 Q<0 Q>0
io
200
LU %
200
"O
0
0
n=3 -200

-200 '~ b) Sequential Q~0

600
b) Sequential n=3 / ~ n=5
400 ILl
"0
400

200 b / :~/ \O> 0

LU
"O
0
-200 , , , , , i
10 15 20
16
E,ab(O) {MeV)
Fig. 2. Adiabatic calculations ( i.e. Q = 0 ). (a) The single-peaked
function (single barrier) is obtained in the absence of coupling.
For any number of simultaneous transfer channels a double-
peaked distribution is found, indicating the presence of two ef-
fective eigenchannel barriers. (b) For sequential transfers the
number of peaks is equal to the number of channels. If this is
sufficiently large, the peaks overlap to give a broad flat
distribution.
problem the same "freezing" occurs but now one has
many core complex channels adding to give the broad
(many-channel) distribution. In order to see a more
dynamical situation one must look at channels with
non-zero Q-values.
Further calculations were done allowing finite Q
values for the transfer channels. Assuming all the
transfer channels to have negative Q (i.e. relative ki-
netic energy in the transfer channels less than in the
elastic channel), one obtains the barrier distribu-
tions shown in figs. 3a, 3b by the dashed lines. In the
simultaneous problem we see that the weight of the
lower barrier increases and that of the higher one de-
creases. In the sequential case it can be observed that
the flat distribution one obtained for large channel
number (n = 5 ) in the adiabatic limit of zero Q is de-
formed and the strength from the higher-energy bar-
riers is again shifted to lower energy. This resembles
ILl
200
\ /1"/'\'\.
0
,
25 -200
10 15 20 25
16
E,~b(O) (MeV)
Fig. 3. Finite Q values. For both simultaneous (a) and sequential
(b) processes, the lower-energy barriers (corresponding to neck-
ing) are enhanced at the expense of the higher ones for negative
Q = - 1 MeV (dashed curve). For positive Q (+1 MeV) the
"anti-necking" configuration is enhanced (solid curve).
what one might expect for a classical system which
would seek the lowest energy configuration i.e. neu-
tron matter would flow into the region between the
nuclei and create a neck. This is reflected in the sta-
tistical weight of the lower barrier increasing at the
expanse of the upper one. This phenomenon, there-
fore, reconciles the quantal description of discrete
transfer reactions and the more classical or macro-
scopic picture of neutron flow and neck formation.
However, in the opposite case where all the trans-
fer channels have positive Q values, we find barrier
distributions shown by the solid lines in figs. 3a, 3b.
In this case, the strength is shifted from the low-en-
ergy (enhanced density) part of the barrier distribu-
tion to the high-energy region. Since this higher bar-
rier still corresponds to a reduced neutron density,
the matter in this case principally flows away from
the region between the two cores. This "anti-neck-
ing" effect is rather counter-intuitive since one might

279
Volume 282, number 3,4 PHYSICS LETTERS B
have expected the greater available energy to further
facilitate the search for the configuration with the
lowest barrier. It is, however, possible to find an an-
alogue of these dynamics in a hypothetical case of
"inelastic" scattering with positive Q-values! Con-
sider inelastic scattering of a deformed rotor with
physical (positive) excitation energies. It is well
known that the non-adiabaticity of the system allows
the nucleus to rotate a little towards the lower energy
configuration during the collision. If, however, we
take negative excitation energies, this corresponds to
the target having a negative m o m e n t of inertia and it
will thus rotate in the opposite sense to the applied
torque! We are currently studying this effect in more
detail in a full coupled-channels framework.
In conclusion we have reconciled the microscopic
and macroscopic descriptions of n e u t r o n flow and
neck formation for negative Q-value transfer chan-
nels. For positive Q-values, however, our results are
consistent with an apparent "anti-necking"
configuration.
280
28 May 1992
Two of the authors (I.J.T. a n d M.A.N. ) would like
to acknowledge the NATO collaborative grant NATO
5 - 2 - 0 5 / R G No. 900803.
References
[ 1] P.H. Stelson, Phys. Lett. B 205 ( 1988 ) 190.
[2 ] N. Rowley, G.R. Satchlerand P.H.Stelson, Phys. Lett. B 254
(1991) 25.
[3] C.Y. Wong, Phys. Rev. Len. 31 (1973) 766.
[4] N. Rowley, Workshop on Heavy ion collisions at energies
near the Coulomb barrier, IOP Conference Series No. 110
(Institute of Physics, Bristol, 1990).
[5] H. Esbensen,J.Q. Wu and G.F. Bertsch, Nucl. Phys. A 411
(1983) 275.
[6] J.X. Wei et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 67 ( 1991 ) 3368.
[7] A.T. Kruppa, P. Romain, M.A. Nagarajan and N. Rowley,
submitted to Nucl. Phys. A.
[8] l.J. Thompson, Compul. Phys. Rep. 7 (1988) 167.
[9] C.H. Dasso and S. Landowne, Comput. Phys. Commun. 46
(1987) 187.
[10] B. Imanishi and W. yon Oertzen, Phys. Rep. 155 (1987)
29.