- Email: [email protected]
The 31P(t, p)33P reaction and the usefulness of double-stripping in distinguishing among shell-model calculations
ERRATA
675
V. P. PBRELYGINet al., Ternary fission produced in Au, Bi, Th and U with Ar.ions, Nucl. Phys. Al27 (1969) 577. In some editions fig. 1 has been omitted.
M. R. GUNYE, The Coulomb and c.m. corrections calculations, Nucl. Phys. All8 (1968) 174.
to the nuclear Hartree-Fock
We wish to point out an error committed in the numerical computations regarding the c.m. corrections in the HF calculations. The two-body term pi * pj of the c.m. correction is repulsive and contributes equally to the uncoupled pp and nn matrix elements; its contribution to uncoupled pn matrix elements is zero. Unfortunately, a mistake was committed in the computer programme where the pn matrix elements of the c.m. correction term were wrongly equated to nn matrix elements. This led us to overestimate the repulsive contribution and hence to underestimate E,.,., the cm. correction to the Hartree-Fock energy Enr. The corrected calculations show that the results are significantly different only as far as E,.,,,. values in the fifth column of table 3 are concerned. The corrected E,.,. value is 10.6 MeV in case of 12C. For all the nuclei from 160 to 2sSi in the 2s-ld shell, EC.,. is fairly constant x 9.8 MeV. Obviously the empirical relation in eq. (20) is incorrect and the subsequent discussion in the second paragraph of sect. 5 is invalid.
0. KARBAN et
al., Polarisation in ‘lB(p, p) and llB(p, p’) at 30.3 MeV, Nucl. Phys. Al33 (1969) 255. An error has been discovered in the calculation of one of the inelastic scattering matrix elements for the tensor force. Correction of this error makes small changes to those curves of figs. 3 and 5 which involve a tensor force, the cross sections being more affected than the asymmetries. The changes are smaller than the disagreement with experiment, so the general conclusions of the paper are not affected. The most significant effect is a gross overestimation of the contribution of the tensor force to the scattering; to reproduce the magnitude of the tensor force components shown in the paper, the values of V, in table 3 should be changed from 2.0 to 200 MeV.
W. G. DAVIESet al., The 31P(t, P)~‘P reaction and the usefulness of double-stripping in distinguishing among shell-model calculations, Nucl. Phys. Al28 (1969) 465. p. 471, line 9, should read “The one-body matrix elements (p, 1lazl Ip,) have . . .”
675
V. P. PBRELYGINet al., Ternary fission produced in Au, Bi, Th and U with Ar.ions, Nucl. Phys. Al27 (1969) 577. In some editions fig. 1 has been omitted.
M. R. GUNYE, The Coulomb and c.m. corrections calculations, Nucl. Phys. All8 (1968) 174.
to the nuclear Hartree-Fock
We wish to point out an error committed in the numerical computations regarding the c.m. corrections in the HF calculations. The two-body term pi * pj of the c.m. correction is repulsive and contributes equally to the uncoupled pp and nn matrix elements; its contribution to uncoupled pn matrix elements is zero. Unfortunately, a mistake was committed in the computer programme where the pn matrix elements of the c.m. correction term were wrongly equated to nn matrix elements. This led us to overestimate the repulsive contribution and hence to underestimate E,.,., the cm. correction to the Hartree-Fock energy Enr. The corrected calculations show that the results are significantly different only as far as E,.,,,. values in the fifth column of table 3 are concerned. The corrected E,.,. value is 10.6 MeV in case of 12C. For all the nuclei from 160 to 2sSi in the 2s-ld shell, EC.,. is fairly constant x 9.8 MeV. Obviously the empirical relation in eq. (20) is incorrect and the subsequent discussion in the second paragraph of sect. 5 is invalid.
0. KARBAN et
al., Polarisation in ‘lB(p, p) and llB(p, p’) at 30.3 MeV, Nucl. Phys. Al33 (1969) 255. An error has been discovered in the calculation of one of the inelastic scattering matrix elements for the tensor force. Correction of this error makes small changes to those curves of figs. 3 and 5 which involve a tensor force, the cross sections being more affected than the asymmetries. The changes are smaller than the disagreement with experiment, so the general conclusions of the paper are not affected. The most significant effect is a gross overestimation of the contribution of the tensor force to the scattering; to reproduce the magnitude of the tensor force components shown in the paper, the values of V, in table 3 should be changed from 2.0 to 200 MeV.
W. G. DAVIESet al., The 31P(t, P)~‘P reaction and the usefulness of double-stripping in distinguishing among shell-model calculations, Nucl. Phys. Al28 (1969) 465. p. 471, line 9, should read “The one-body matrix elements (p, 1lazl Ip,) have . . .”