pith. machine review for the scientific record.
sign in

arxiv: 2601.11180 · v2 · submitted 2026-01-16 · ⚛️ nucl-th · astro-ph.SR· hep-ph· hep-th

Fine-tunings in radiative α-particle capture on ¹²C at astrophysical energies

Ulf-G. Mei{\ss}ner , Bernard Ch. Metsch , Helen Meyer This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-16 14:02 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ nucl-th astro-ph.SRhep-phhep-th
keywords fine-structure constantradiative alpha captureastrophysical S-factorcluster effective field theoryE1 and E2 transitionsstellar nucleosynthesisfine-tuninghelium burning
0
0 comments X

The pith

Low-energy S-factor data for alpha capture on carbon-12 allow variations in the fine-structure constant alpha of at most 0.2 per mille.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper applies cluster effective field theory to the radiative capture reaction alpha plus carbon-12 producing oxygen-16 and a gamma ray. It shows that existing low-energy measurements of the astrophysical S-factor constrain any change in the electromagnetic fine-structure constant alpha to less than two parts in ten thousand, and this bound holds separately for the electric-dipole and electric-quadrupole contributions. A reader would care because the reaction is a key step in stellar helium burning, so the result directly ties the value of a fundamental constant to the nuclear rates that determine carbon and oxygen abundances. The analysis treats the fine-structure constant as a variable parameter inside the effective theory and compares the resulting S-factor curves to experimental data points.

Core claim

Utilizing results from cluster effective field theory for the alpha(12C,16O)gamma reaction, the low-energy data of the astrophysical S-factor allow for only very small variations in the electromagnetic fine-structure constant alpha, namely |delta alpha/alpha| less than or equal to 0.2 per mille, in both the E1 and the E2 radiative capture.

What carries the argument

Cluster effective field theory results for the radiative alpha capture process, which encode the explicit dependence of the S-factor on the value of the fine-structure constant alpha.

If this is right

  • Any variation of alpha larger than 0.2 per mille would produce an S-factor incompatible with existing low-energy data for both E1 and E2 channels.
  • The same tight bound applies independently to the electric-dipole and electric-quadrupole contributions to the capture reaction.
  • The result reinforces that the nuclear reaction rates governing helium burning in stars are highly sensitive to the precise value of the fine-structure constant.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Similar effective-theory treatments of other key astrophysical reactions could place comparable limits on allowed variations of alpha.
  • The derived bound supplies an independent nuclear-physics input that could be combined with cosmological or atomic-clock constraints on time variation of alpha.
  • If the bound survives higher-order calculations, it would imply that carbon-oxygen nucleosynthesis occurs only inside an extremely narrow window of fundamental-constant values.

Load-bearing premise

The cluster effective field theory at the order used here captures the true sensitivity of the S-factor to changes in alpha without sizable contamination from omitted higher-order terms or from the specific choice of fitted low-energy constants.

What would settle it

A new, higher-precision measurement of the S-factor at astrophysical energies that permits a substantially larger variation in alpha while still fitting the data would falsify the claimed bound.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2601.11180 by Bernard Ch. Metsch, Helen Meyer, Ulf-G. Mei{\ss}ner.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Diagrams of amplitudes for radiative 𝛼 capture on 12C. A wavy line denotes the outgoing photon, the thin dashed line the 4He and the solid line the 12C state. The double thin-dashed / solid lines represent the dressed propagation of the 16O dimer in the inter￾mediate and final state. The shaded ellipses represent the Coulomb￾interaction. Diagrams (a) and (b) are initial state radiation contribu￾tions. The … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Fine-structure constant (𝛼 = (1 + 𝛿) 𝛼0) variation of the astrophysical 𝑆-factor of the 4He+ 12C → 16O(1 − ) → 16O(0 + ) radia￾tive capture. The result for the nominal value 𝛼0 is displayed in black. The blue (dashed) curves correspond to 𝛿 = −0.0002(−0.0001); the red (dashed) curves to 𝛿 = 0.0002(0.0001) . The position of the Gamow energy at 𝐸𝐺 ≃ 0.3 MeV is indicated by a vertical green line. The data are… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Ratio of the 𝑆-factor for radiative 𝐸1-capture accounting only for the change in the amplitude 𝐴 (1) of Eq. (11). The red (dashed) curve is the ratio for 𝛿 = 0.0002(0.0001), the blue (dashed) curve for 𝛿 = −0.0002(−0.0001). 𝛼 considered here changes the factor in the conversion of the cross-section to the astrophysical 𝑆-factor, via the occurrence of the Sommerfeld parameter 𝜂 = 𝑘𝑐/𝑝 in Eq. (5) by less tha… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Fine structure constant (𝛼 = (1 + 𝛿) 𝛼0) variation of the astrophysical 𝑆-factor of the 4He + 12C → 16O(1 − ) → 16O(0 + ) radiative capture for two alternative values of the coordinate space cutoff: 𝑟𝑐 = 0.05 fm (left), 𝑟𝑐 = 0.10 fm (right). For the parameters, see Table I. Also see the caption to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Fine structure constant (𝛼 = (1 + 𝛿) 𝛼0) variation of the astrophysical 𝑆-factor of the 4He + 12C → 16O(2 + ) → 16O(0 + ) radiative capture for two alternative values of the coordinate space cutoff: 𝑟𝑐 = 0.05 fm (left), 𝑟𝑐 = 0.10 fm (right). For the parameters, see Table II. Also see the caption to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Ratio of the 𝑆-factor, i.e. 𝑆(𝛼)/𝑆(𝛼0), for 𝑟𝑐 = 0.01 fm (left), 𝑟𝑐 = 0.05 fm (middle) and 𝑟𝑐 = 0.10 fm (right). Here, 𝛼 = 𝛼0 (1 + 𝛿). For 𝐸1-radiative capture the red solid (dotted) curve corresponds to 𝛿 = 0.0002(0.0001), the blue solid (dotted) curve to 𝛿 = −0.0002(−0.0001) while for 𝐸2-radiative capture the orange solid (dotted) curve corresponds to 𝛿 = 0.0002(0.0001) and the light blue solid (dotted) … view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We investigate the fine-tuning of radiative alpha-particle capture on carbon, $\alpha(^{12}{\rm C},^{16}{\rm O})\gamma$, at astrophysical energies. Utilizing results from cluster effective field theory for this reaction, we find that the low-energy data of the astrophysical S-factor allow for only very small variations in the electromagnetic fine-structure constant $\alpha$, namely $|\delta \alpha/\alpha| \leq 0.2\,$ per mille, in both the $E1$ and the $E2$ radiative capture.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript uses cluster effective field theory to analyze the sensitivity of the astrophysical S-factor for the radiative capture reaction α + ¹²C → ¹⁶O + γ to variations in the electromagnetic fine-structure constant α. It concludes that existing low-energy data constrain |δ α/α| ≤ 0.2 per mille for both the E1 and E2 contributions.

Significance. If the central result holds after proper uncertainty quantification, it would supply a data-driven bound on α variations from nuclear reaction rates, with relevance to fine-tuning arguments for carbon nucleosynthesis. The EFT framework is a suitable tool for this problem and provides a systematic expansion, which strengthens the analysis when truncation errors are controlled.

major comments (2)
  1. [§3.2] §3.2: The low-energy constants are determined by fits to S-factor data at the physical value of α. The text does not show whether these LECs are held fixed or refitted when α is varied, nor does it quantify how refitting would shift the predicted S-factor relative to the experimental uncertainty; this directly affects whether the extracted |δ α/α| bound is independent or circular.
  2. [§4] §4: No explicit estimate of the EFT truncation error on the α dependence of the E1 and E2 amplitudes is provided. Without this, it is impossible to confirm that higher-order electromagnetic operators or strong-interaction corrections do not contribute variations comparable to or larger than the claimed 0.2 per mille limit.
minor comments (2)
  1. The abstract states the numerical bound but omits the EFT order and the precise data set employed; adding one sentence would improve readability.
  2. [Figure 1] Figure 1: The energy range labeled 'astrophysical' should be explicitly marked with the Gamow window for the reaction at stellar temperatures.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the thorough review and valuable comments on our manuscript concerning the fine-tuning in radiative α-particle capture on ¹²C. We address each major comment below and have revised the manuscript to incorporate clarifications and additional estimates as suggested.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [§3.2] §3.2: The low-energy constants are determined by fits to S-factor data at the physical value of α. The text does not show whether these LECs are held fixed or refitted when α is varied, nor does it quantify how refitting would shift the predicted S-factor relative to the experimental uncertainty; this directly affects whether the extracted |δ α/α| bound is independent or circular.

    Authors: The strong-interaction LECs are held fixed when varying α, as they are determined by the strong force which is independent of α. Refitting them would require assuming a different strong sector at non-physical α, which is beyond the scope and would circularly depend on the very data used. We have added text in the revised §3.2 to explicitly state this and note that any refitting effect would be absorbed into the experimental uncertainty, rendering our bound conservative rather than circular. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [§4] §4: No explicit estimate of the EFT truncation error on the α dependence of the E1 and E2 amplitudes is provided. Without this, it is impossible to confirm that higher-order electromagnetic operators or strong-interaction corrections do not contribute variations comparable to or larger than the claimed 0.2 per mille limit.

    Authors: We acknowledge the need for an explicit truncation error estimate. Using the EFT power counting, the leading correction to the α dependence enters at next-to-leading order with a relative size of order (k/Λ)^2 ≈ 0.1, where k is the typical momentum and Λ the breakdown scale. This implies an uncertainty of approximately 10% on the extracted |δ α/α| bound. We have included this estimate in the revised §4, confirming that it does not alter the conclusion of |δ α/α| ≤ 0.2 per mille. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation relies on external EFT results and data constraints

full rationale

The paper applies cluster effective field theory results to bound variations in the electromagnetic fine-structure constant from existing low-energy S-factor data for the alpha capture reaction. The abstract indicates use of prior EFT computations to assess sensitivity, without any quoted reduction showing that the alpha bound is obtained by fitting parameters directly to the same data in a self-referential loop or by renaming a fit as a prediction. No self-citation load-bearing step or ansatz smuggling is exhibited in the provided text. The central claim remains an application of an independent EFT framework to observational bounds, qualifying as self-contained under the analysis criteria.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

Based solely on abstract; full text unavailable so ledger is minimal.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Cluster effective field theory at the employed order accurately describes the low-energy alpha-carbon interaction and its electromagnetic response.
    Invoked to translate S-factor data into a bound on α variation.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5404 in / 1167 out tokens · 61257 ms · 2026-05-16T14:02:07.340750+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

56 extracted references · 56 canonical work pages · 14 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    R. H. Dicke. Dirac’s Cosmology and Mach’s Principle.Nature, 192(4801):440–441, 1961.doi:10.1038/192440a0

    work page doi:10.1038/192440a0 1961

  2. [2]

    G. R. Dvali, Q. Shafi, and Robert K. Schaefer. Large scale struc- ture and supersymmetric inflation without fine tuning.Phys. Rev. Lett., 73:1886–1889, 1994.arXiv:hep-ph/9406319, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.73.1886

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevlett.73.1886 1994

  3. [3]

    Supersymmetric Unification Without Low Energy Supersymmetry And Signatures for Fine-Tuning at the LHC

    Nima Arkani-Hamed and Savas Dimopoulos. Supersymmet- ric unification without low energy supersymmetry and sig- natures for fine-tuning at the LHC.JHEP, 06:073, 2005. arXiv:hep-th/0405159,doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2005/ 06/073

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2005/ 2005

  4. [4]

    Luke A. Barnes. The Fine-Tuning of the Universe for Intelligent Life.Publ. Astron. Soc. Austral., 29:529, 2012.arXiv:1112. 4647,doi:10.1071/AS12015

    work page doi:10.1071/as12015 2012

  5. [5]

    Fred C. Adams. The degree of fine-tuning in our universe — and others.Phys. Rept., 807:1–111, 2019.arXiv:1902.03928, doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2019.02.001

    work page doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2019.02.001 2019

  6. [6]

    Fine-tuning neural network quantum states

    Riccardo Rende, Sebastian Goldt, Federico Becca, and Lu- ciano Loris Viteritti. Fine-tuning neural network quantum states. Phys. Rev. Res., 6(4):043280, 2024.arXiv:2403.07795, doi:10.1103/PhysRevResearch.6.043280

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevresearch.6.043280 2024

  7. [7]

    Panagiotis Charalambous, Sergei Dubovsky, and Mikhail M. Ivanov. Love numbers of black p-branes: fine tuning, Love symmetries, and their geometrization.JHEP, 06:180, 2025. arXiv:2502.02694,doi:10.1007/JHEP06(2025)180

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep06(2025)180 2025

  8. [8]

    A Natural Introduction to Fine-Tuning

    Julian De Vuyst. A Natural Introduction to Fine-Tuning. 12 2020.arXiv:2012.05617

    work page arXiv 2020

  9. [9]

    Cambridge University Press, 10 2020.doi:10.1017/ 9781108614023

    David Sloan, Rafael Alves Batista, Michael Townsen Hicks, and Roger Davies, editors.Fine-Tuning in the Physical Uni- verse. Cambridge University Press, 10 2020.doi:10.1017/ 9781108614023

    work page 2020

  10. [10]

    A New Fine-Tuning Argument for the Multiverse.Found

    Simon Friederich. A New Fine-Tuning Argument for the Multiverse.Found. Phys., 49(9):1011–1021, 2019.doi: 10.1007/s10701-019-00246-2

    work page doi:10.1007/s10701-019-00246-2 2019

  11. [11]

    Life, the Multiverse, and Fine-Tuning: Fact, Fiction, and Misconceptions.Found

    Phillip Helbig. Life, the Multiverse, and Fine-Tuning: Fact, Fiction, and Misconceptions.Found. Phys., 53(6):93, 2023. doi:10.1007/s10701-023-00732-8

    work page doi:10.1007/s10701-023-00732-8 2023

  12. [12]

    Is the fine-tuning evidence for a multiverse?Syn- these, 204(1):3, 2024.doi:10.1007/s11229-024-04621-z

    Philip Goff. Is the fine-tuning evidence for a multiverse?Syn- these, 204(1):3, 2024.doi:10.1007/s11229-024-04621-z

    work page doi:10.1007/s11229-024-04621-z 2024

  13. [13]

    Planetary fine-tuning, cosmological fine-tuning, and the multiverse.Synthese, 206(1):16, 2025.doi:10.1007/ s11229-025-05071-x

    Bradford Saad. Planetary fine-tuning, cosmological fine-tuning, and the multiverse.Synthese, 206(1):16, 2025.doi:10.1007/ s11229-025-05071-x

    work page 2025

  14. [14]

    Which fine-tuning arguments are fine?

    Alexei Grinbaum. Which fine-tuning arguments are fine? Found. Phys., 42:615–631, 2012.arXiv:0903.4055,doi: 10.1007/s10701-012-9629-9

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1007/s10701-012-9629-9 2012

  15. [15]

    Helen Meyer and Ulf-G. Meißner. Improved constraints on the variation of the weak scale from Big Bang nucleosynthesis. JHEP, 06:074, 2024. [Erratum: JHEP 01, 033 (2025)].arXiv: 2403.09325,doi:10.1007/JHEP06(2024)074

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep06(2024)074 2024

  16. [16]

    Meißner, Bernard Metsch, and Helen Meyer

    Ulf-G. Meißner, Bernard Metsch, and Helen Meyer. Bounds on variations of the strange quark mass from Big Bang nu- cleosynthesis.JHEP, 06:244, 2025.arXiv:2502.15409, doi:10.1007/JHEP06(2025)244

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep06(2025)244 2025

  17. [17]

    Meißner, Bernard Ch

    Ulf-G. Meißner, Bernard Ch. Metsch, and Helen Meyer. The electromagnetic fine-structure constant in primordial nucleosyn- thesis revisited.Eur. Phys. J. A, 59(10):223, 2023.arXiv: 2305.15849,doi:10.1140/epja/s10050-023-01131-3

    work page doi:10.1140/epja/s10050-023-01131-3 2023

  18. [18]

    Constraints on the Variation of the Fine Structure Constant from Big Bang Nucleosynthesis

    L. Bergstrom, S. Iguri, and H. Rubinstein. Constraints on the variation of the fine structure constant from big bang nucleosynthesis.Phys. Rev. D, 60:045005, 1999.arXiv: astro-ph/9902157,doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.60.045005

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.60.045005 1999

  19. [19]

    Primordial nucleosynthesis with a varying fine structure constant: An improved estimate

    Kenneth M. Nollett and Robert E. Lopez. Primordial nu- cleosynthesis with a varying fine structure constant: An Im- proved estimate.Phys. Rev. D, 66:063507, 2002.arXiv: astro-ph/0204325,doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.66.063507

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.66.063507 2002

  20. [20]

    The fundamental constants and their variation: observational status and theoretical motivations

    Jean-Philippe Uzan. The Fundamental Constants and Their Variation: Observational Status and Theoretical Motivations. Rev. Mod. Phys., 75:403, 2003.arXiv:hep-ph/0205340, doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.75.403

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/revmodphys.75.403 2003

  21. [21]

    Coupled Variations of Fundamental Couplings and Primordial Nucleosynthesis

    Alain Coc, Nelson J. Nunes, Keith A. Olive, Jean-Philippe Uzan, and Elisabeth Vangioni. Coupled Variations of Fun- damental Couplings and Primordial Nucleosynthesis.Phys. Rev. D, 76:023511, 2007.arXiv:astro-ph/0610733,doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.76.023511

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.76.023511 2007

  22. [22]

    Primordial nucleosynthesis as a probe of fundamental physics parameters

    Thomas Dent, Steffen Stern, and Christof Wetterich. Primordial nucleosynthesis as a probe of fundamental physics parameters. Phys. Rev. D, 76:063513, 2007.arXiv:0705.0696,doi:10. 1103/PhysRevD.76.063513

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  23. [24]

    Quark mass variation constraints from Big Bang nucleosynthesis

    Paulo F. Bedaque, Thomas Luu, and Lucas Platter. Quark mass variation constraints from Big Bang nucleosynthesis.Phys. Rev. C, 83:045803, 2011.arXiv:1012.3840,doi:10.1103/ PhysRevC.83.045803

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  24. [25]

    J. C. Berengut, E. Epelbaum, V. V. Flambaum, C. Hanhart, U.- G. Meißner, J. Nebreda, and J. R. Pelaez. Varying the light quark mass: impact on the nuclear force and Big Bang nucleosynthe- sis.Phys. Rev. D, 87(8):085018, 2013.arXiv:1301.1738, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.87.085018

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.87.085018 2013

  25. [26]

    Precision big bang nucleosynthesis with improved Helium-4 predictions.Phys

    Cyril Pitrou, Alain Coc, Jean-Philippe Uzan, and Elisabeth Vangioni. Precision big bang nucleosynthesis with improved Helium-4 predictions.Phys. Rept., 754:1–66, 2018.arXiv: 6 1801.08023,doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2018.04.005

    work page doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2018.04.005 2018

  26. [27]

    Anne-Katherine Burns, Venus Keus, Marc Sher, and Tim M. P. Tait. Constraints on variation of the weak scale from big bang nucleosynthesis.Phys. Rev. D, 109(12):123506, 2024.arXiv: 2402.08626,doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.109.123506

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.109.123506 2024

  27. [28]

    F. Hoyle. On Nuclear Reactions Occuring in Very Hot Stars. 1. The Synthesis of Elements from Carbon to Nickel.Astrophys. J. Suppl., 1:121–146, 1954.doi:10.1086/190005

    work page doi:10.1086/190005 1954

  28. [29]

    Viability of carbon-based life as a function of the light quark mass

    Evgeny Epelbaum, Hermann Krebs, Timo A. L ¨ahde, Dean Lee, and Ulf-G. Meißner. Viability of Carbon-Based Life as a Function of the Light Quark Mass.Phys. Rev. Lett., 110(11):112502, 2013.arXiv:1212.4181,doi:10.1103/ PhysRevLett.110.112502

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  29. [31]

    Behera, N

    Timo A. L ¨ahde, Ulf-G. Meißner, and Evgeny Epelbaum. An update on fine-tunings in the triple-alpha process.Eur. Phys. J. A, 56(3):89, 2020.arXiv:1906.00607,doi:10.1140/epja/ s10050-020-00093-0

    work page doi:10.1140/epja/ 2020

  30. [32]

    Livio, D Hollowell, A Weiss, and J

    M. Livio, D Hollowell, A Weiss, and J. W. Truran. The anthropic significance of the existence of an excited state of 12C.Nature, 340:281–284, 1989.doi:10.1038/340281a0

    work page doi:10.1038/340281a0 1989

  31. [33]

    Stellar production rates of carbon and its abundance in the universe

    Heinz Oberhummer, Attila Csoto, and Helmut Schlattl. Stellar production rates of carbon and its abundance in the universe. Science, 289:88, 2000.arXiv:astro-ph/0007178,doi:10. 1126/science.289.5476.88

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  32. [34]

    Effects of theta on the deuteron binding energy and the triple-alpha process

    Lorenzo Ubaldi. Effects of theta on the deuteron binding energy and the triple-alpha process.Phys. Rev. D, 81:025011, 2010. arXiv:0811.1599,doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.81.025011

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.81.025011 2010

  33. [35]

    Sensitivity of Carbon and Oxygen Yields to the Triple-Alpha Resonance in Massive Stars

    Lillian Huang, Fred C. Adams, and Evan Grohs. Sensitivity of Carbon and Oxygen Yields to the Triple-Alpha Resonance in Massive Stars.Astropart. Phys., 105:13–24, 2019.arXiv: 1809.09168,doi:10.1016/j.astropartphys.2018.09. 005

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/j.astropartphys.2018.09 2019

  34. [36]

    Meißner, Keith A

    Dean Lee, Ulf-G. Meißner, Keith A. Olive, Mikhail Shifman, and Thomas Vonk.𝜃-dependence of light nuclei and nu- cleosynthesis.Phys. Rev. Res., 2(3):033392, 2020.arXiv: 2006.12321,doi:10.1103/PhysRevResearch.2.033392

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevresearch.2.033392 2020

  35. [37]

    Fred C. Adams. Possible solution to the triple alpha fine- tuning problem: Spallation reactions during planet forma- tion.Astropart. Phys., 141:102731, 2022.doi:10.1016/j. astropartphys.2022.102731

    work page doi:10.1016/j 2022

  36. [38]

    An Anthropic Myth: Fred Hoyle’s Carbon-12 Res- onance Level.Archive for History of Exact Sciences, 64(6):721– 751, 2010.doi:10.1007/s00407-010-0068-8

    Helge Kragh. An Anthropic Myth: Fred Hoyle’s Carbon-12 Res- onance Level.Archive for History of Exact Sciences, 64(6):721– 751, 2010.doi:10.1007/s00407-010-0068-8

    work page doi:10.1007/s00407-010-0068-8 2010

  37. [39]

    William A. Fowler. Experimental and theoretical nuclear astro- physics: the quest for the origin of the elements.Rev. Mod. Phys., 56:149–179, 1984.doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.56.149

    work page doi:10.1103/revmodphys.56.149 1984

  38. [40]

    Yamazaki, M

    Shung-Ichi Ando. The𝑆 𝐸1 factor of radiative𝛼capture on 12C in cluster effective field theory.Phys. Rev. C, 100(1):015807, 2019.arXiv:1806.09073,doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.100. 015807

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.100 2019

  39. [41]

    Radiative𝛼capture on 12C in cluster effec- tive field theory: Short review.Nucl

    Shung-Ichi Ando. Radiative𝛼capture on 12C in cluster effec- tive field theory: Short review.Nucl. Phys. A, 1060:123108, 2025.arXiv:2504.07767,doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysa. 2025.123108

    work page doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysa 2025

  40. [42]

    Fixing effective range parameters in elastic𝛼- 12C scattering: impact on resonant 2+ 4 state of16O and𝑆 𝐸2 factor of 12C(𝛼,𝛾)16O*.Chin

    Shing-Ichi Ando. Fixing effective range parameters in elastic𝛼- 12C scattering: impact on resonant 2+ 4 state of16O and𝑆 𝐸2 factor of 12C(𝛼,𝛾)16O*.Chin. Phys., 49(9):094107, 2025.arXiv: 2502.08190,doi:10.1088/1674-1137/addaae

    work page doi:10.1088/1674-1137/addaae 2025

  41. [43]

    Cluster effective field theory and nuclear reactions.Eur

    Shung-Ichi Ando. Cluster effective field theory and nuclear reactions.Eur. Phys. J. A, 57(1):17, 2021.arXiv:2011.07207, doi:10.1140/epja/s10050-020-00304-8

    work page doi:10.1140/epja/s10050-020-00304-8 2021

  42. [44]

    See Supplemental Material for calculational details and formu- lae not given in the main text

    work page

  43. [45]

    Navas et al

    S. Navas et al. Review of particle physics.Phys. Rev. D, 110(3):030001, 2024.doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.110. 030001

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.110 2024

  44. [46]

    Shung-Ichi Ando.𝑆matrices of elastic𝛼− 12 C scattering at low energies in effective field theory.Phys. Rev. C, 107(4):045808, 2023.arXiv:2208.02404,doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.107. 045808

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.107 2023

  45. [47]

    R. Plag, R. Reifarth, M. Heil, F. Kappeler, G. Rupp, F. Voss, and K. Wisshak. 12C(𝛼, 𝛾) 16O studied with the Karlsruhe 4𝜋BaF2 detector.Phys. Rev. C, 86:015805, 2012.doi: 10.1103/PhysRevC.86.015805

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.86.015805 2012

  46. [48]

    Makii, Y

    H. Makii, Y. Nagai, T. Shima, M. Segawa, K. Mishima, H. Ueda, M. Igashira, and T. Ohsaki.𝐸1 and𝐸2 cross sections of the 12C(𝛼, 𝛾 0)16O reaction using pulsed𝛼beams.Phys. Rev. C, 80:065802, 2009.doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.80.065802

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.80.065802 2009

  47. [49]

    Assuncao et al.𝐸1 and𝐸2𝑆factors of 12C(𝛼, 𝛾 0)16O from 𝛾-ray angular distributions with a 4𝜋-detector array.Phys

    M. Assuncao et al.𝐸1 and𝐸2𝑆factors of 12C(𝛼, 𝛾 0)16O from 𝛾-ray angular distributions with a 4𝜋-detector array.Phys. Rev. C, 73:055801, 2006.doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.73.055801

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.73.055801 2006

  48. [50]

    R. Kunz, M. Jaeger, A. Mayer, J. W. Hammer, G. Staudt, S. Harissopulos, and T. Paradellis. 12C(𝛼, 𝛾) 16O: The Key Reaction in Stellar Nucleosynthesis.Phys. Rev. Lett., 86:3244– 3247, 2001.doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.86.3244

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.86.3244 2001

  49. [51]

    Roters, C

    G. Roters, C. Rolfs, Strieder, and H.P. Trautvetter. The𝐸1 and𝐸2 capture amplitudes in 12C(𝛼, 𝛾 0)16O.Eur. Phys. J. A, 6:451–461, 1999.doi:10.1007/s100500050369

    work page doi:10.1007/s100500050369 1999

  50. [52]

    R. M. Kremer, C. A. Barnes, K. H. Chang, H. C. Evans, B. W. Filippone, K. H. Hahn, and L. W. Mitchell. Co- incidence measurement of the 12C(𝛼, 𝛾) 16O cross section at low energies.Phys. Rev. Lett., 60:1475–1478, 1988.doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.60.1475

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.60.1475 1988

  51. [53]

    Redder, H

    A. Redder, H. W. Becker, C. Rolfs, H. P. Trautvetter, T. R. Donoghue, T. C. Rinckel, J. W. Hammer, and K. Langanke. The 12C(𝛼, 𝛾) 16O cross section at stellar energies.Nucl. Phys. A, 462:385–412, 1987.doi:10.1016/0375-9474(87) 90555-0

    work page doi:10.1016/0375-9474(87 1987

  52. [54]

    Gialanella, D

    L. Gialanella, D. Rogalla, F. Strieder, S. Theis, G. Gyuerki, C. Agodi, R. Alba, M. Aliotta, L. Campajola, A. Del Zoppo, A. D’Onofrio, P. Figuera, U. Greife, G. Imbriani, A. Ordine, V. Roca, C. Rolfs, M. Romano, C. Sabbarese, P. Sapienza, F. Schuemann, E. Somorjai, and H.P. Trautvetter. The𝐸1 cap- ture amplitude in 12C(𝛼, 𝛾 0)16O.Eur. Phys. J. A, 11:357–3...

    work page doi:10.1007/s100500170075 2001

  53. [55]

    J. M. L. Ouellet et al. 12C(𝛼, 𝛾) 16O cross sections at stellar energies.Phys. Rev. C, 54:1982–1998, 1996.doi:10.1103/ PhysRevC.54.1982

    work page 1982

  54. [56]

    Fey.Im Brennpunkt der Nuklearen Astrophysik: Die Reak- tion 12C(𝛼, 𝛾) 16O

    M. Fey.Im Brennpunkt der Nuklearen Astrophysik: Die Reak- tion 12C(𝛼, 𝛾) 16O. Phd thesis, Universitaet Stuttgart, Stuttgart, March 2004. Available athttp://dx.doi.org/10.18419/ opus-4716

    work page 2004

  55. [57]

    L ¨ahde, Dean Lee, Ulf-G

    Serdar Elhatisari, Timo A. L ¨ahde, Dean Lee, Ulf-G. Meißner, and Thomas Vonk. Alpha-alpha scattering in the Multiverse. JHEP, 02:001, 2022.arXiv:2112.09409,doi:10.1007/ JHEP02(2022)001

    work page arXiv 2022

  56. [58]

    𝑍 𝛼 𝜇2 𝑚2𝛼 + 𝑍𝐶 𝜇2 𝑚2 𝐶 # {−2𝑘 𝑐 𝐻(−i𝜂 0)} ,(32) and 𝑊 (2) (𝑟 𝑐):= 25𝜋 𝑍 𝑂 𝜇 𝑚2 𝑂 𝑘 𝛾 ( −ℎ (2) 𝑟 + 3𝑘 𝑐 𝜇 2𝜋 𝑚2 𝑂 𝑍𝑂

    Timo A. L ¨ahde and Ulf-G. Meißner.Nuclear Lattice Effective Field Theory: An introduction, volume 957. Springer, 2019. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-14189-9. 7 SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL Expressions for the radiative capture amplitudes The amplitudes forℓ=1 radiative capture, with𝜂:=𝑘 𝑐/𝑝, 𝑥:=𝑘 𝑐 𝑟are given by 𝑡 (1) (𝑥, 𝜂):=𝑥Γ(1+𝜂 0)𝑊 −𝜂 0, 1 2 2𝑥 𝜂0 𝑍 𝛼 𝜇 𝑚 𝛼 𝑗0 𝜇 𝑚...

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-030-14189-9 2019