Paper detail

Reexamination of reaction rates for a key stellar reaction of $^{14}$O($α$,p)$^{17}$F

The reaction rates of the key stellar reaction of $^{14}$O($α$,p)$^{17}$F have been reexamined. The previous conclusion, the 6.15-MeV state ($J^π$=1$^-$) dominating this reaction rate, has been overthrown by a careful reanalysis of the previous experimental data [J. Gómez del Campo {\it et al.}, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 86}, 43 (2001)]. According to the present $R$-matrix analysis, the previous 1$^-$ assignment for the 6.15-MeV state is definitely wrong. Most probably, the 6.286-MeV state is the 1$^-$ state and the 6.15-MeV state is a 3$^-$ one, and hence the resonance at $E_x$=6.286 MeV ($J^π$=1$^-$) dominates the reaction rates in the temperature region of astrophysical interests. The newly calculated reaction rates for the $^{14}$O($α$,p)$^{17}$F reaction are quite different from the previous ones, for instance, it's only about 1/6 of the previous value around 0.4 GK, while it's about 2.4 times larger than the previous value around 2 GK. The astrophysical implications have been discussed based on the present conclusions.

preprint2010arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access8 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.