Coupled channel explanations, which have been offered for the diffractive behavior observed in the differential ground state-ground state cross sections of (${}_{}{}^{16}{}_{}{}^{}\mathrm{O}$, ${}_{}{}^{18}{}_{}{}^{}\mathrm{O}$) reactions on Ni isotopes, are in apparent disagreement with data for transfer to the ${}_{}{}^{18}{}_{}{}^{}\mathrm{O}$($2^{+}$) state. A study of available quasielastic reaction data, elastic, inelastic, and transfer suggests the surface-transparent potentials both can better describe the optical phenomena observed in the angular shapes and can minimize effects due to coupled channels. As a byproduct a description, which does not require a large ${}_{}{}^{18}{}_{}{}^{}\mathrm{O}$($2_1^{}{}_{}{}^{+}$) quadrupole moment, is obtained for the troublesome angular distribution in ${}_{}{}^{18}{}_{}{}^{}\mathrm{O}$ + ${}_{}{}^{58}{}_{}{}^{}\mathrm{Ni}$ inelastic scattering.

[NUCLEAR REACTIONS CCBA analysis (${}_{}{}^{16}{}_{}{}^{}\mathrm{O}$, ${}_{}{}^{18}{}_{}{}^{}\mathrm{O}$) reaction on Ni isotopes and all related quasielastic processes. Dependence on optical potentials examined.]

• Received 7 September 1977

DOI:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.17.555