R-Process with Magnetized Nuclei at Dynamo-Explosive Supernovae and Neutron Star Mergers
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The author investigates the influence of extremely strong magnetic fields ranging up to ten teratesla on the r-process occurring in core-collapse supernovae and neutron star mergers. For that purpose, he considers spherical nuclei and applies self-consistent mean-field theory in an external magnetic field. He finds a linear magnetic response with a magnetic susceptibility of tens of nuclear magnetons. He calculates the resulting increases in the neutron gamma-capture cross-sections and the relative abundance of nuclei (Z,A+1) and (Z,A) and he concludes that the r-process path is shifted towards nuclei with smaller masses. This is an interesting result.
This investigation is based on state-of-the-art methods. It is clearly written, and it is definitely of interest for the discussion of nucleosynthesis. I, therefore, recommend publication of the present version in the journal Universe.
Author Response
Dear Colleague,
Thank you very much for the report and warm encouragement.
All the best. Sincerely,
Vladimir Kondratyev
Reviewer 2 Report
See attached report106.pdf file
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Dear Colleague,
Thank you very much for the report regarding the manuscript, constrictive criticism and useful suggestions, which are accounted for in the revised version.
Specifically to your comments.
Point a: “The perturbative treatment of the magnetic effects must be better justified, …”
Response a: The remark is accounted for in a paragraph before Eq.(3).
Point b: “There is a misprint in the definition of the magnetic susceptibility k lj α in Eq.(5). … “…
Response b: Thank you very much for careful reading the manuscript. The corrections are done.
Point c: “In my opinion, the explanation about the effect of the magnetic field in closed-shell…”
Response c: The explanations are improved. I hope it is clear in the revised version.
Point d: “The nuclei 48Cr and 48Ti are deformed …”
Response d: The remark is accounted for in additional description of the model used before Fig.1 and adding 2 references.
Point e: “The r-process in magnetic fields (Figures 3) …”
Response e: I add Eq. (8) and the respective description in the revised version.
Point f: “In my opinion Ref.[10] …”
Response f: Ref.[10] is corrected.
All the best. Sincerely,
Vladimir Kondratyev
