Comment on "Solution of the $\alpha$-Potential Mystery in the $\gamma$ Process and Its Impact on the Nd/Sm Ratio in Meteorites"

TL;DR

This paper critiques a previous assumption that Coulomb excitation and compound nucleus formation can be described with the same optical model potential in alpha-induced reactions below the Coulomb barrier, providing evidence for their distinct treatment.

Contribution

It demonstrates that Coulomb excitation and compound nucleus formation require separate modeling approaches, challenging prior assumptions in nuclear reaction analysis.

Findings

Coulomb excitation and compound nucleus formation have different partial wave contributions.

The integration radii for CE and CN processes differ significantly.

The optical model potential should be distinct for CE and CN in low-energy alpha reactions.

Abstract

A competition of the low-energy Coulomb excitation (CE) with the compound nucleus (CN) formation in $\alpha$-induced reactions below the Coulomb barrier has been assumed by Rauscher [Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 061104 (2013)] in order to use the same optical model (OM) potential for description of the latter and the alpha-particle emission as well. In this Comment we show that the corresponding partial waves and integration radii provide evidence for the distinct account of the CE cross section and OM total-reaction cross section.