Reply to “Comment on ‘Compound nucleus aspect of sub-barrier fusion: A new energy scaling behavior’ ”

Figure 1

${}^{58}\mathrm{Ni}+{}^{58,60,64}\mathrm{Ni}$ and ${}^{64}\mathrm{Ni}+{}^{64}\mathrm{Ni}$ fusion excitation functions data. ${}^{58}\mathrm{Ni}+{}^{64}\mathrm{Ni}$ of Ref. [2] are shown as green open dots and of Ref. [1] are shown as green closed dots). ${}^{64}\mathrm{Ni}+{}^{64}\mathrm{Ni}$ of Ref. [2] are shown as blue open dots, of Ref. [1] as black closed dots, and of Ref. [3] as blue closed stars.

Figure 2

Energy-reduced ${}^{19,17}\mathrm{F}+{}^{208}\mathrm{Pb}$ fusion data: black closed stars are for ${}^{19}\mathrm{F}$ and black open dots are for ${}^{17}\mathrm{F}$, together with indicated data for similar systems.

Figure 3

The energy-reduced, fusion-reduced excitation functions obtained for the fusion reactions ${}^{28,30}\mathrm{Si}+{}^{24,26}\mathrm{Mg}$ [5] (black symbols), ${}^{32,34}\mathrm{S}+{}^{24,25,26}\mathrm{Mg}$ (red and blue symbols), ${}^{28}\mathrm{Si}+{}^{30}\mathrm{Si}$ (green dots), ${}^{32}\mathrm{S}+{}^{27}\mathrm{Al}$ (magenta dots), and ${}^{27}\mathrm{Al}+{}^{45}\mathrm{Sc}$ (olive stars).