Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Williams Nuclear and Particle Physics PDF

    Uploaded by

    Jonathan Cano
    110 views395 pages

    Original Title

    335939786-315438834-Williams-Nuclear-and-Particle-Physics-pdf.pdf

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    110 views395 pages

    Williams Nuclear and Particle Physics PDF

    Uploaded by

    Jonathan Cano

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 395
    Nuclear and Particle Physics HS « W. S. C. Williams Department of Physics, University of Oxford and St Edmund Hall, Oxford | CLARENDON PRESS - OXFORD Oxford University Press, Great Clarendon Street, Orford OX? 6DP Orford New York Auchiand Bangiok Buenos Aires Cope Town Chenna Dav es Salaam Dethi Hong Kong istanbul Karachi Kolkata Kuala Lumpur Madrid Melbourne Mexico City Mumbat Nairobi Sto Vaulo Shanehes Faipei Tokyo Toronte Oxford is w trade murk uf Oxford University Press Published! in the United States by Oxford University Press inc, New York OWS.C. Williams, 1991 First publisited 1991 Reprinted 1992 (with corrections), 1984 (vith data updates), 1995, 1946 (with corrections nd data uptates, 1997 (sith dates updates), 2003 (iwiee). 200%, 2606 AN Tights reserved. 10 part of tay pubtication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior permission in wriving of Oxford Universicy Press. Within the UK, exceptions ae allaw adi respect of any fair dealing for the purpase of research ar private study, or criticism or review, as permitted under the Copyright. Designs and Patents Act, 1988, ur in the case of reprogeaphie reproduction in accordance with the terms of licences issued by the Copyright Licensing Agency. Brauiries concerning reproduction outside those terms and in other countries should be set the Rights Department. Oxford University Press, at the address above, This book és sold subject to the condition that tt shall not, by wav of trade or otherwise, be lent, re-sold, hired owt, or otherwise circulated Wwithour the publisher's prior concent in any form of binding or vorer ‘over chan thar in which it is publishes! and wishout a sitar comltion including this condition being impased an the subsequent purchaser Briish Library Cataloguing in Publication Data Williams, W. S.C Nuclear and partite phystes. 1 Tile S307 Library of Comgress Cataloging im Publication Dat Williams, W. S.C. Wiliam S.C ‘Nuclear and particle physics | W. S.C. Williams. Inciuées biblirgraphical references. J. Nucleur physies. 2. Particles (Nuclear phasies) J. Tile. OCT. F997 939.72" dead 90 THO ISBN. 13: 978.0.19.852046.7 ISBN-10: 0 19-852086-8 Printed and howad im Grout Britain by The Bath Press. Bail For Renée, Claire, and Matthieu , } | Preface My intention in preparing this book was to provide a text on nuclear and particle physics for use by university undergraduates in the penultimate year of their studies for a first degree in physics. I have assumed that at this point they will have completed courses in electromagnetism, quantum mechanics, and atomic physics. | have chosen the level to which the subject has been treated in & way which I trust will satisfy two groups. The first is those who need an introduction to a subject that they will study in greater depth and detail in th final year using other, more advanced texts, The second group contains those who do not propose such studies but who need @ complete and, as far as possible, up-to-date coverage suitable for a less specialized course. This policy is ‘exemplified in the problems; many have been adapicd from questions sct in past Final Honours School Examinations in Physics at the University of Oxford. “They have been selected from among the examination papers set each year that all students in physics take but not from the advanced paper in nuclear and particle physics that some choose to take. Tam indebted to E.H. Bellamy, J. H. Cobb, J. Gulley, J. E, Paton, and J.V. Peach for reading parts of the typescript and for many helpful comments. Lam also grateful to other colleagues for useful discussions about physics. Naturally Tam responsible for the final result and for any mistakes it may contain. Tam grateful to my daughter, Claire Williams, for help with Figs 2.8 and 2.9 and to Marilyn Coles for producing word-processed disk fies from a draft ‘manuscript; to Irmgard Smith and Alan Holmes who worked on the drawings, and to Cyril Band and his staff, particularly Jane Burrage, who did the photography. Thanks also to the staff at OUP for their help. Oxford WSC. December 1990 1am grateful to readers who have drawn my attention to errors and misprints, or have provided up-to-date data, They are Alasdair Kergon, H. Ferdinande, Georges Vanpraet, Pekka Pyykk6, Arno Bohm, Steven Grimes, Jenay Williams and Anders Markvardsen. June 1997, WS.C.W, Pia vil Acknowledgements For photographs of distinguished physicists | am indebted to the following: The American Institute of Physics Niels Bohr Library for photographs of Ruther- ford (courtesy of Otto Hahn and Lawrence Badash), Becquerel, Planck, Heisenberg and Dirac (gift of Mrs Mark Zemansky); Professor Aage Bohr for the photograph of his father, Niels Bohr, Ruth Braunzier for the photograph of her father Erwin Schrédinger (courtesy of Zentralbibliothek fiir Physik, Wien): The Cavendish Laboratory, Cambridge, for the photograph of JJ. Thomson; The Deutsches Museum, Miinchen, for the photographs of Réntgen and of Yukawa; The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel, for the photograph of Binstcin (courtesy of the AIP Niels Bohr Library); Professor Walter Moore for the photograph of de Broglie. originally published in Erlebre Physik by Franz von Krebk, Berlin, 1942 Tam also pleased to thank. for material and permission to reproduce: Sidney Harris @ for the cartoon of Einstein (Fig. 1.3) and for Figs 9.23 and 14.6; Bob Thaves © 1984 and United Media, New York, for the cartoon of Ernest and Frank (Fig. 9.9}; Professor J.J. Simpson, University of Guelph, for the spectrum and Kurie plot for tritium beta decay (Fig. 12.10); Gallerie dell’Accademia, Venezia, for Leonardo da Vinci's Vitruvian Man (Pig. 2.1); The European Cenire for Nuclear Research (CERN Photo) for bubble-chamber photographs (Figs 10.3, 10.4, 10.5, 12.17, and 12,18) and for computer reconstruction of a W and of a Z event (9.19 and 9.20) taken by the UAI Collaboration (with permission); The Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, California, for a bubble- chamber photograph (Fig. 10.8); The European Southern Observatory © for the before and after photographs of SNI987A; Deutsches Eiectconen-Synchro- tron (DESY) for computer reconstructions of two events trom the TASSO detector (Figs 10.17 und 10.19), My thanks are due to publishers and authors (when possible) for permission to reprint of to adapt from the publications named: The American Physical Society, from Physical Review and Physical Review Letters (Figs 2.7, 34, 5.3, 7.13 and 11.2b); The American Institute of Physics, from The Jounal of Chemical Physics (Fig. 1.2c), Cambridge University Press from Exvays in Nuclear Astrophysies (Fig. 14.3) and from Radiations from radioactive sub- stances by Rutherford, Chadwick, and Ellis (Table 1.3); Elsevier Science Publications, SV, from Nuclear Phsics and Physics Letters (Figs 3.5, 3.6, 7.8, 7.13, 9.19 and 9.20); The Institute of Physics Publishing Ltd, from Reports on Progress tt Physics (Fig, 9,14), MacMillan Magazines Ltd © 1947, Fig. 11.1 reprinted by permission from Nature vol. 159, p.126; MacMillan Publishers Lid, for Alice Through the Looking Glass by Tenniel (Fig, 12.13); Oxford University Press, for examination questions; Pergamon Press, Oxford, from The Journal of the Franklin Institute (Fig, 11.8); The Royal Society, London, from The Proceedings of the Royal Society (Figs 7.1 and 11.4); Springer-Verlag, Berlin, from Naturwissenschaft (Fig, 6.6). Contents 1 Introduction 1.1 Historical perspective 1 12 The Rutherford scattering formula 3 1.3. The properties of the Rutherford differential cross-section 9 ‘ 14 The experiments of Rutherford and his colleagues 10 1.5 Examination of the assumptions 19 16 The nuclear constituents 3B 1.7 What is coming? 16 Reference 16 2 Some Quantitative Formalitios 2.1 Introduction ” 2.2 The scale of nuclear physics and suitable units ” 2.3. The radioactive decay law 2» 24 — Multimodal decays 2B 2.5 The production of radioactive material 2 26 Sequential decays 6 2.7 The measurement of the transition rate 2 28 Radioactive dating » . 29 Decay and the uncertainty principle » 2.10 Collisions and cross-sections 3 2.11 Probabilities, expectations, and fluctuations 8 References 3» : 3 The and Shape of Nuclei 3.1 The size of nuclei 40 3.2 The scattering of electrons by nuclei al : 33 The muclear electric charge distribution at 34 ‘The muctear electric form-factor a 3.5. The isotope shit a7 3.6 X-ray spectroscopy of mu-mesic atoms 48 : 3.7 Nuclear scattering and nuclear size 50 3.8 Overview of size determinations 32 39 The shape of nuclei 32 - References 3 Comms i Eee cece cece eee eee eee Comes 4 The Masses of Nuclei 4.1 The naturally oocurring nuclei 4.2. The nuclear binding energy 4.3 The liquid drop model 44 The Coulomb and asymmetry terms 4.5 The implications of the semi-empirical mass formula 4.6 Conclusions References 5 Nuclear Instability 5.1 Nuclear decay 5.2 Energy-level diagrams 5.3 Mote on f-decay 54 The stability of nuclei 5.5 Spontaneous fission 56 Tricks with transition rates 5.7 Conclusion Reference 6 Alpha Decay 6.1 Introduction 6.2 Other properties of a-decay 6.3 The simple theory of Coulomb barrier penetration 64 The angular momentum barrier 6.5 Decay schemes involving a-particle emission 6.6 Barriers in other decays 6.7 Some conclusions References 7 Nuclear Collisions and Reactions 7.1 Historical introduction 7.2 Matters of definition 7.3 Kinematics of nuclear collisions 74 — Conservation laws in nuclear collisions and reactions 7.8 What can we learn from studying nuclear reactions? 7.6 Nuclear spectroscopy 7.7 The compound nuckeus model 7.8 — Compound state properties 7.9 Direct reactions 7.10 Compound state to direct TAL Elastic seattering 7.12 Induced fission and the fission reactor 7.13 Reactor control and delayed neutron emission 7.14 Energy from nuclear fusion 35 56 a @ 65 66 66 67 B 8 » 80 82 82 85 89 92 93 100 102 17 508 108 2 4 0 12 123 123 1 128 718 Conclusion References 8 Nuclear Models 8 82 83 84 85 86 87 8a 89 8.10 8a 8.12 Introduction ‘The magic numbers 1 “The shell model: preliminaries “The spin-orbit interaction ‘The magic numbers 2 ‘The spins and parities of nuclear ground states, Electromagnetic moments: magnetic dipole Electromagnetic moments: electric quadrupole Excited states in the shell model ‘The collective model and other developments Reconciliation Au resoir to nuclei 9 Forces and Interactions 9.1 Some nomenclature 9.2 Electromagnetism 9.3 The Dirac equation 94 Feynman diagrams 9.8 More fun with Feyaman diagrams 9.6 Tests of QED 9.7 Nuclear forces 98 — The bound two-nucleon system. 9.9 The unbound two-nucleon system 9.10 The Yukawa theory 9.11 Quarks, gluons, and QCD 9.12 The strong interaction 9.13 The weak interaction 9.44 Conclusion References Introduction ‘The hadrons The quark-parton Model: Stage I The quark-parton Model: Stage Il The quark-parton Model: Stage Ill. Heavy flavours Producing heavy flavours The value of R and colour Resonances in e*e~ annihilation and quarkonia Fragmentaiion Further evidenee for quarks ond gluons 129 130 131 131 134 140 141 142 144 148 Ist 152 154. 187 158, 159, 160 161 165 166 168, 1 im 17s 179 ial 181 185 187 Corars aii Cones 10.11 Isotopic spin 10.12 The top quark 10.13 Conchusion References 11 The Electromagnetic Interaction 11.1 Introduction 11.2 The energy loss by ionization 11.3 The bremsstrahlung process 11.4 Photon absorption and scattering LL5 The radiation of photons by nuclei and particles 16 Rates for electric transitions 11,7 Rates for magnetic transitions 11.8 Selection rules in 7-ray emission 11.9 Nuclear isomerism L110 Other electromagnetic processes 11.11 Resonance duorescence and absorption of photons 112 Summary References 12 The Weak Interaction 121A review Neutrino and antineutrino Neutrinos galore 124 The W and Z gauge bosons 12.5 ‘The Fermi theory of P-decay 12.6 The Kurie plot 12.7 The ft valve and some approximations 128 Femmt's coupling constant 12.9 Through the looking-glass 12.10 Neutrinos and the looking-glass 12.11 Neutrino scattering 12.12 Neutrino mass 12.13 Another neutrino problem 12.14 Conclusion References 13. Particles: Summary and Outlook 13.1 The conservation laws 13.2 Recognizing what is going on 13.3 CP violation 134 The standard model 13.8 Beyond the standard model 13.6 Grand unified theories 13,7 Proton decay detectors 13.8 Theories of everything 27 21 233 233 24 235 247 250 255 259 261 263 266 267 2m 275 207 278 280 283 286 294 299 299 305 309 au 318 320 321 328 322 324 327 329 333 333 337 341 13.9 Open questions 343 References 344 14 Nuclear and Particle Astrophysics 14.1 The expanding Universe 34s 14.2 Big Bang nucleosynthesis 346 14.3 Stellar evolution M7 14.4 Stellar nucleosynthesis 1 350 14.5 Stellar nucleosynthesis 2 354 146 — Nucleosynthesis: summary 355 14.7 Neutrinos in siellar evolution 1 357 148 Neutrinos in stellar evolution 2 360 149 Supemovae 362 14.10, SNI987A 364 14.11 Black hole formation 368 14.12 Now and the future 369 14.13 The first 225 seconds 370 14.14 Conclusion 373 References 373 : Appendix A The Atomic Elements 374 Appendix 8 Constants 375 Answers to Problems 316 Index 379 Contents tit SESE carat etn TE ait - Hl. Ernest Rutherford (1871-1937), the father of nuclear physics. This photopraph was taken about 1906, five years before his discovery af the atomic nucleus, In 1908 he received the Nobel Prize in chemistry ‘for his investigations into the disintegration of the elements and the chemistry of radioactive substances Introduction 1,1 Historical perspective In their classic work, Radiations from radioactive substances published in 1930, Rutherford, Chadwick, and Ellis refer to three discoveries as marking the beginning of an epoch in which rapid progress became possible in attacking the fundamental problems of physics on the nature of electricity and the consti- tution and relation of the atoms of the elements: 1895 The discovery of X-rays by Réntgen; 1896 The discovery of the radioactivity of uranium by Beequerel; 1897 The discovery of the electron by J. J. Thomson, As vital to the interpretation of the investigations that followed they mention the role played by two other events: 1900 The discovery of the black body radiation formula by Planck; 1913 Bohr's theory of the hydrogen atom. tis our belief that, insofar as the development of nuclear physies is concerned, other developments must be added: 19S The development of she theory of special relativity by Einstein; J911_ The discovery of the atomic nucleus by Rutherford; 1926 and later The development of non-relativistic and relativistic quantum mechan- ics by de Broglie, Schrddinger, Heisenberg, Dirac and others. ‘Much that followed from these developments is now a part of our culture and hhas had a profound impact on our technology and science. However, we need t0 distinguish three areas of physics. Atomic physies is the physies of the behaviour of atoms and in particular of their electronic structure. That layer of the structure of matter depends for its existence on the nuclear atom but it is not markedly affected by the properties of the nucleus, apart from its charge and, to a lesser extent, by its spin and magnetic moment. Simitarly the behaviour of the nucleus is little affected by the electronic structure surrounding it so that nuclear physies can, 2s a subject, be almost completely isolated from atomic physics. However, all methods of detecting nuclear and particle radiation depend on atomic physics. From nuclear physics came elementary particle physies. Two events marked its beginning: 1935 Yukawa’s meson hypothesis (see Section 9.10); DEFINITIONS AND KEYWORDS: ‘Atomic physics The pinysios of the slacvonic,exra-nuctoor stuck of alos. Nuclear physics The physics of the atomic nucless, belioved 19 be consti- ‘uted of neutrons and protons, Elomentary particle physics The physies of quarks and gluons, believed 1o be the constituents of protons and ‘euttone, and of leptons and gsuge bosons and ... whe knows what else [Notation Names given to particles gent ted in radioactive changes and what thoy ‘xeparticle Nuciaus ofthe helium atom. ‘Prparticte Electron, ‘ray Photon. [Neat alphabetically but not emitted in radioactive change! S-ray Electron knocked out of an stom by the passaga of fast charged particle. ‘Sometimes called a knock-on elacton, Hitois eospece 4 1 Wilhelm Réntgen (1845-1923). Discovered X-rays (1895) ‘while investigating the proporties of cathode rays. (The passage of sleciticity trough gases at low pressures was known to cause tha mission from tha cathode af what was called cathode rays.) 2 Honsi Becquerel (1852-1908). Discovered the radioactivity of Uranium (1896) while investigating the fluorescence properties ot uranium sas 3 Max Planck (1858-1947). Discovered (1800) the formula Dorreetly describing the spectrum af the electromagnetic cadiation fmitied by a black body end thereby introduced the idea of the ‘quantum to physics. 4-4. J. Thomson (1886-1940). Discovared the electron in his investigations into the nature of cathode rays (1897). Fig. 1.2 Four of the scientists whose discoveries iniiated the exploration of the structure of atoms, nucle, and matter, 1946 ‘The discovery of pi-mesons by Powell and co-workers (see Section 9.10). ‘This subject is concerned with the neutron and proton and related particles, and in particular with their constituents, the quarks and ghuons. Iti also concerned with other entities such as the photon and the leptons, that appear, like quarks and ghions, to have no substructure, This level of the structure of matter is so far removed from normal experience that it has made little impact on our culture; none the less it exists. It is not clear to what extent this layer dominates the behaviour of the one above, the nuclear physics level. Whether or not there is a layer of new structure below the one of quarks, gluons, and leptons, which wwe call elementary particles, is presently a matter for speculation From 1913 onwards atomic physics and nuclear physics advanced in parallel. ‘The flowering of quantum mechanies brought order to atomic physics and is 2 tvotution Fig. 1.3 Albert Einstein (1879-1955). In the cartoon the artist, Sidney Harris, has drawn a figure instantly recognizable as that of the mature Einstein. But, of course, he was @ young ‘man when he derived E=mc*. The photograph was take ublshed bis Special Theory of Relativity. This was one in the field of theoretical physis, the greatest being the General Theory af Relativity : published in 1915, essential to the interpretation of nuclear physics. In this chapter we shall trace 4 with some historical emphasis the discovery of the nucleus and the carly stages Fin the development of the subject. In later chapters we shall not use that approach but attempt to gain an up-to-date and immediate view and under standing of the subject at a simple level appropriate to an introductary course The latter part of this volume will be concerned with a description of the physics of the elementary particles. Following the discovery of the radioactivity of uranium, there was a successful search for other naturally occurring radioactive elements and the recognition by Rutherford and Soddy thet radioactivity involved a change in the mass and chemical nature of an element. The new element produced in any radioactive change was ilseif frequently radioactive. In fact, three radioactive series were recognized in which heavy elements lost mass and changed their atomic number in successive changes, the changes ending only when the element tdecame an isotope of lead. In all these spontaneous changes three types of radiation were recognized. They are: (1) serays: these were found to be positively charged particles with a ratio of ccharge to mass about one half that of a singly charged hydrogen atom. It became clear that these rays were energetic nuclei of helium. stored paspectse 3 3 1 Niels Bohr (1885-1962) developed the festsuccessful made! of probiems in sold stomic, and nucteer physics. This photogreph was the hydrogen atom (1813) and mage many important contibutions taken in about 1227. 01h interpretation of qusntim macharics and to the devalopment : 4 Werner Heisenberg (1801-1978) formulated the matix sf sed mushy Ths photog ma beni aout Be Saati eh nett cinoeeealtiaest a oe | unegtainty tations that bear his name (1927). The photograph 2 Louis de Broglie (1882-1987) who triggered the development was taken near the time of thase advances, ‘of quanti mechanios by associating a wave-ite behaviout Wilt 5 peut pirae (1902-1964) dt te ialadeie i tograph was tkan in about aul Dirac iscovered ic wave ea matter (1922), Thi informal photograph was taken ia about 1824. son for tn electron (1828). He gave, In Einstein's opivion, tha 3 Erwin Schrbdinger (1887-1961) derived the equation which logically most perfect presentation...” of quantum mechaniés. The beos ‘his: name (1828). It is the basis of the wave mochanice date of this photograph is nat known but i was probably taken approsch e quentum phsnomens and allowed the solution ofmany shorty after 1928. Fig. L4 A few of the famous names associated with the development of non-relativistic and ‘relativistic quantum mechanics. The achievements mentioned in the captions do not do full stice to the many other contributions made by these scientists, In addition, the choice of these five must not lead us to neglect the many others who, at the same time and since, have put their mark on the progress of quantum mechanics. Yet, in spite of its formidable successes, the significance of the interpretation placed upon it remains a topic of debate, (2) prays: these are negatively charged patticles which were found to be identical to the electrons found by J, J. Thomson, although in general much more energetic tham those generated in electrical discharges. (3) yerays: these are electrically neutral particles with properties which identified them as energetic photons. These radiations were present to lesser or greater extent in the emissions from each radioactive clement, the differences being in the relative intensities and the energy of the radiation, not in its nature, Thus every radioactive change involving the emission of an a-partick for example, might be expected to cause ‘change in the atomic mass and number. The displacement laws were enunciated by Russell and by Soddy and Fajans. We give them in « modern form: 1. The emission of an a-particle reduces the atomic mass number by 4 and the atomic number by 2 2, The emission of a B-particle increases the atomic number by 1 and leaves, the mass number unchanged. {t was through the investigation of the scattering of a-particles that the most important advances were made. Rutherford in 1906 observed that a beam of xparticles became spread slightly on traversing a thin layer of material. A layer of material insulficient to stop a-particles (e.g, gold 4m thick) would scatter xparticles an average of about 9 degrees. However, in 1909 Rutherford’s colleagues, Geiger and Marsden, observed that one in a few thousand xparticles suffered a scattering of greater than 90°. This was an astonishing result. At thal time there was an atomic model dus to J. J. Thorson which envisaged the atom as a sphere of uniformly distributed positive charge in which was embedded a number of negatively charged particles (electrons): in this model the scattering of positively charged particles would be by repulsion by the positive charge and by the attraction of the electrons. Such an atom can only give small deflections to an a-particle that traverses it: the deflections observed after traversing a layer of material were taken to be the effect of many such collisions acting randomly on the particle's trajectory, Such an atom cannot give the rare, large-angle scatters that were observed, and Rutherford showed that the observed rate of large-angle scattering could not be explained as the sum of multiple collisions with atoms of this kind. He pro- posed the nuclear model of atoms and showed that such a model can explain both small deflections of a beam of «-particles traversing a thin foil and the rare large-angle deflections. The former was explained as the result of many very small angle deflections (multiple scattering) and the latter as the result of rare single encounters of a-particles with atoms in which there is a large deflection (single scattering). Rutherford used his model to ealculate a cross- section for the large-angle scattering that was in accord with observation. This agceement established his nuclear model. We shall derive the Rutherford scattering formula in the next section, 1.2 The Rutherford scattering formula Although Rutherford derived this formula with a-particles as the incident, to- be-scatiered particle, we shall be slightly more general and assume that incident particle carries positive charge ze, where ¢ is the magnitude of the electronic charge. Firstly the model: Displacement laws 1. The coneaquencs of the amission of an 2 pat oly ig 10 reduce the atomic ‘mass number by 4 end the atomic ‘umber by 2. 2. The consequence ofthe emission of 2 ie to Increase the atomic inchanged, peticle | = ‘by one and to lee the mass numb DEFINITIONS AND KEYWORDS. | Single soattoring The deflection. of | the peth of 9 particle crossing a ayes of material's the result of 2 significant do flection none, and only one, encounter vith an atom, Muttiple scattering The dellection of the path isthe result of the sum of many very small deflections in many atoms, al uncorelatad, Multiple scatering is inevitable for charged particles and a significant single scatter Will have superimposed on it the Uuncorstatod ‘offect of the multiple seat- which tors. Tho mageitude of these processes, both colative: ‘and absolute, is determined by the thickness and nature of the mates | il, and by the charge and energy af ihe | panic, The Ruther scameing mule 1. The atom contains a nucleus with positive charge Ze and almost the entire Rutherford scattering eden tena mass of the ator. ‘Assumptions 2. The electrically neutral atom contains Z electrons moving around the 1 The nuclear model nucleus. 2 Torger nucleus fixed {ne eco) eel 3 Point-ike charges IL is easy to show that the electrons cannot cause a single scattering with | 4 Couoeb force only significant deflection of a-particles of the kinetic energy that Rutherford 5 Eleatic settening 8 Beste seattenng considered, so we shall now neglect them. Our other assumptions are: 3. That the target nucleus is very much more massive than the incident particle and therefore does not recoil significantly in the collision. 4, That classical mechanics can be used t0 describe the collision. (And, of course, we thereby include the conservation of momentum, angular momentum and energy.) 5. That the target nucleus and the incident particle have point-like charge distributions so that the Coulomb povential F()= Zze'/4negr acts between them, where ris the distance sepatating their centres. We will be treating, the orbit of the incident particle classically and will work out the case of like charges (as is the case in a-particle-nucleus scattering) and therefore of a repulsive force, 6. That there is no other force acting other than that due to the Coulomb potential 7. That there is no excitation of incident of target particle: each remains unchanged. This is elastic scattering, The symbols we shall use are defined in Table 1.1. Figure 1.5 shows an orbit. ‘The incident particle, if undeflected, would pass the centze (at Q) of the target nucleus at a distance b, the impact parameter. In fact, the orbit is hyperbolic and at D the incident particle is at its distance of closest approach, d. ‘The orbit is Table 1.1 The notation fr eusmniies vse in ‘ering Rutheror's formula fer the eteren- tial scauonng crecs-taction for the oleic ‘staring of one charged petite by & xed ‘Curged target partie wslociy Icio Siete ene roee tieeiecnage ng fg rekon (0) Imes rset Caan fost Svea at toe * Nena ss Fig. 1.5 The classical orbit ofthe incident particle in Rutherford seastering for non ese 2ef0 impact paremeter & te pole cocranates wits teaest to O01 point basa —————— — (Gn on te vajecory * ¥ of partic ; laesel a das: Fig. 1.6 The classical orbit in Rutherford scattering for zero impact parameter, Semnan talon: seotg.1.6 Conservation of energy requires that the incident porticle’s distance of closest ‘approach p, is given by p= ZA tae T. 6 lnodston clearly symmetric about the line OD. If b was zero the incident particles would approach to a distance p (see Fig. 1.6). At this point the incident kinetic energy is transformed into mechanical potential energy in the Coulomb field, therefore: dmetp= Zzetldaey, ap Step 1 To find the connection between b and 8. We use the conservation af angular momentum about 0 to connect the incident velocity to the component of the velocity transverse to OX at Xt mob = mr? 8, a2) hence an Consider now the component of the linear momenturn in the direction OD. This changes from ~mosin(8/2) to +ravsin(#/2). AX the rate of change of this ‘momentum is the component of the Coulomb repulsion in the direction OD. Hence vind ( zae?dnee 2mesing [oe dneye "eos ed We use equation (1.3) to change the variable of integration from time, 1, to @. obtaining 2musin’ 0 Zac pene ae ie 2 aed ops PP Ls which gives = ad nS sh This is the relation required from Step 1 Step 2 To derive a first cross-section, ‘The relation (1.4) tells us that as 6 decreases 9 increases, Therefore to suffer an angle of scatter greater than © the impact parameter @ cust be less than (p/2)cot(@/2). That means the incident particle must strike a disc of this radius centred at O and perpendicular to 2. The area. a, presented by the nucleus for seattering through an angle greater than @ is the area of this dise. That is 2 @) = Peco «sy o(9>@) got yt or in its Full glory: _ af Ze) @ aire) =¥( Ze DEFINITIONS AND KEYWORDS Impact parameter This isthe perpen- dlculat eistance from the centre of the arget 10th tory of the apolation of the ti ident particle before it sutters any deflection. | Momentum transfer This isthe momentum transforred ta dhe target in Bingle scatter (eymbo! 4). Comment These queries ae not spa- cite to Rutharford seatering which is ur present eubject of discussion. How= cept | ever impact parameter isa classical con- Tre Retort sare foraee 7 “The area ais called a cross-seetion: if the reader is concerned about the meaning and use of this term we suggest reading Section 2.10, where a fuller description of the concept is given, before proceeding. Step 3 To obtain the angular differential cross-section. What we want is d2/dQ, which is the cross-section per unit solid angle located ‘tan angle 6. The element of solid angle d& between 0 and 4-+dd is given by dQ = Insinodd. Therefore ‘The da/d0 we need is (d/d@)o(9> ©) from Equation (1.5) and hence we obtain a (Ea)o$ “9 Table 1.2 A summary of results obtained for Rutherford scattering. Tho impact peremoter & the angle of scatter fi, and pare lated by p= 26 tan (072). whore cd eat ‘The cross-section for seating through an angle graster than © is o0roy=te( Zp )ae? “The angular differortal cross-section for scattering through an angle # 8 (0) _ (Za aat Tone o Jone Pesig sone into aire t2e (sh) (Yow, =" (ay) (orien od wd sh 22 (7 a8 (amr) For an explanation ofthe units, soa Section 2.2 This is the famous Rutherford formula for the differential cross-section in Coulomb scattering, We assumed a repulsive Coulomb force. If the force is attractive the orbit is changed so that 6+ —8, but the differential cross-section is unchanged. PROBLEMS. Try the following problems. keeping an eye on Sections 1.2 and 1.3, in order fo take the Lunfamiliarty out of the Rutherford seattering formula. 111 Calculate the cross-section forthe scattering of a 10 MeV 2: particle by 2 gold nucieus 1-197) through an angle greater than (2) 10°, (b) 20", (c) 36°, Neglect nuclear 1.2 For the same cltumstance as in Problem 1.1 calculate the diferential scattering cross seetion do/AS tn? for seameting at 10° 1.3 The Rutherford scarering formula has the property that asthe angle of scarter, #-+0". 65/30, The practical circumstances are that the incident carticle will be scattered by the whole atom. Suggest what happens to dc/df2as 80 in ths case. 1.4 Show that the distance of closest approach df in Rutherford scattenng leading to an angle of deflection 0, is given by aE (1+ cone d= E(t teovee 2), whore p is datined in Fig. 1.6. (Uso the conservation of energy and angular momentum,} 1.3 The properties of the Rutherford differential cross-section The cross-section (1) decreases rapidly with increasing angle, 8 (2) becomes infinite at 6=0, (3) is inversely proportional to the square of the incident part energy, 7, (@) is proportional to the square ofthe charge ofthe ineident particle and of the target nucleus. Let us examine these results to get a feel for what they mean physically. As @ increases the momentum transfer (g, sce Fig. 1.7) increases. The greater itis the larger the electric force the particles must experience to bring it about. Large electric fields mean close collisions; the closer, the rarer they are and the cross section decreases with increasing 6. It is now possible to understand property 3 at a Bxed angle the required momentum transfer will increase as docs 7. Thus the cross-section must decrease with increasing T. The difficulty implied in property 2 is really nonexistent. We ask the reader to consider this diffculty in Problem 1.3. Property 4 is typical of electromagnetic interactions and we shall meet this idea again. Essentially these two particles interact through the electromagnetic field. The quantum-mechanical amplitude for charge Z.to interact with the field is proportional to Ze. ‘Thus the Rutherford scattering amplitude is proportional to zZe’ and the final intensity (cross-section) is proportional to (zZe"?. cle’s kinetic ® Fig. £7 The momentum transfer qin clastic seattering at a fixed target. The vectors P, and P, represent the incident and scattered particle momenta respectively (|, /=| P,| =P. Ifthe ample of scatter i 0, the geometry gives g= 2P siniO)2) The ropes the Rua dtl csseton 9 leven 1.4 The experiments of Rutherford and his colleagues Geiger, in 1911, verified that the angular distribution of a-particles scattered between 30° and $0 by a thin gold foil was in agreement with the theory. Later Geiger and Marsden in a more extensive series of experiments verified that (1) the angular distribution was varying as cosec'9/2, for 3° <@< 150", Q) the yield in this angular range was proportional to the thickness of the foil, and 3) the cross-section for scattering in Al, Cu, Ag, Sn, and Au varied approximately as the squatre of the atomic weight, Result 1 was a verification of Rutherford’s formula and of the essential correctness of his nuclear model of the atom. Result 2 verified that the large- angle scattering was duc to single encounters and not duc (o the sum of many small-angle scatters (an essential fact in establishing the correctness of Ruther- ford's interpretation; see Problem 1.7). The last result we now know follows from the fact that Z for a nucieus is nearly proportional to 4. The identification of the nuclear charge in units of e came from Moseley’s investigations of X-ray spectra, Chadwick, in 1920, made direct measurements of the nuclear Z using a-particle scattering. In Table 1.3 we reproduce some pages from Rutherford, Chadwick and Ellis describing the apparatus used by Geiger and Marsden and the results obtained. 1.5 Examination of the assumptions Rutherford assumed a nuclear model: that assumption was vindicated by the experimental results. Let us look at the other assumptions: 1. Neglect of nuclear recoil: this can be avoided by transforming to the centre- of-mass of the collision. The formula is the same but the effective T'is now the total kinetic energy in that frame and the angle of scatter and differential cross-section apply in that frame. These latter quantities must be transformed buck to the faboratory frame (target at rest) for @ comparison with experimental results 2. The classical approach to the orbit: a simple quantum-mechanical ap- proach using the Born approximation gives the same answer. The value of the classical approach ists transparency and that it gives the right answer! We shall use some of the ideas in the classical approach later but what we say must not distract us from knowing that the quantum-mechanical approach is ‘more correct’ 3. The point-like charges: Rutherford and Chadwick could find no deviation from the formula in the scattering of 2-pasticles from radium B and C, using gold, silver and copper targets: knowing the classical distance of closest approach they concluded that these nuclei, if they had size, had radii which were less than 3.2, 2.0 and 1.2 10-'*m respectively. Later, using targets of several light elements deviations from the Rutherford formula were found: for example, in aluminium deviations occurred for a classical distance of closest approach of about 8x 10-'Sm, We know that this represented the effect of nuclear interaction, as distinct from the Coulomb interaction, coming into play at short distances of approach. We shall discuss this when we discuss nuclear size in Chapter 3. 4, Absence of other forces: OF course, we have just introduced the nuclear lore te box vas ud tox ade ‘Srnas paoon hich eal be aie Tote igh pa ‘Toe miemecpe itive with ser rata withthe et, Mik the wostrng fo and sorse ronan ent. "Dne Boe at Sopris i te ta te lo 1.3 An exact rom Radiations from Radioactive Substances by Sir Ernest Rutherford, James Chadwick, and C.D. Elis. pub- Vished by Cambridge University Prass, 1920. ‘doe by anon pte andes be qchaiettroegh s "Tae sure of a pare war ary Le i ih x, The Seats scr vac elon oot imogrncon ee frst the pov etn Aso So ton Bean me nde Me fe ae tar withthe nv (nag ee ech up a ‘dean woe tok or mgh l anng betnen dL bot teeta qi swore lave natal Tot St parte re cao, th Roe om ying, awe Coon {ita ard thes ahr 9 fo phrag D wa ese erie woder toner hl te aoe IESG be wate pcr nem soseed nore somparel ‘a tanga at tenn pee some prices std tothe us seni emer oe foe ts airs wey ‘apy athe nghe mater veut eno em {Sew mre enantio tt tn 2 ‘Seiratine cu made sy ore ml all aged te sae tae Toe stg torte ese ot U e len, ae het af te sear the eons ‘Sh tre to salar nd sporty ts comton a leo ey evn whe oo Watening fl warn onion at Pe cite sic er lar These ue due pes teed fw he sg othe dpm lieing #3 Ist pl so tn he ‘Sat te vol Themes tan xernere Farcen we ‘hci gh on pe nb nnn ‘he male tthe dae oe wns arv be mee Jet fortis tow nos right Thin xem Bet as ‘eine at dcr ange a allowed ern to scot ‘Staremen a he te seated pr “Toscleted ema ee spent geen thofaosing (abe Tae ft cacn ges the va ef te wip’? es ‘Se see othe ment Yoel st ante ton In which the vetiaredpice were snide he od etn {Gow the saponin aim of wee Coles oe “aecrecd notre of insta ser snd wl pe. talyonmnnveand wow thera N acre} Tharsis ssorn lobe apprornstely coma lor both met erpdimete rea ri wp, S68) me See B| #) 8 | | a ng che epee at the aller ang to hoe tlre sgn hain a tre pe ee propertialnoe ‘rorabe wale ge vente, wher ane ac fe tbo ‘ron, Thee srenmrnt ive tS than pot of te oe Panag vi nog tadicel Uy Rhett fom th moet ‘ey ft "Gn od Marden net rained the vvintiny of sting sith the chsknoe ofthe matreg atoa. Te thie tad cet ‘accent apecnsa St wun seneary to 4 sure of mee {iene prt, oe tea anda tweet byte ‘hon —tht to set face very lym he rey ‘hee parte mye rdnead inden arin of epoca the angle ‘searing wat hap sta, wet inn of te aera, {a ea rr. Toe «porch rom » ame ot raion (B+ Barinanon ote asus 2 Inroin forces but if any of the colliding particles have spin (and therefore ‘magnetic moment) then there will be magnetic effects, i. an interaction between the spins and between each spin and the current represensed by the passage of the charge of the other particle. Later we illustrate the effect of one particle having spin (electron scattering, see Section 3.4) 5. Elastic scattering: The a-particles used by Rutherford were not sufficiently ‘energetic to cause a significant number of inelastic collisions. By inelastic collision we mean that one or both of the particles involved become excited or disintegrate. After Rutherford, attificial sources of more energetic a-particles became available and these certainly can cause inelastic collisions. Another implicit assumption which we must be prepared to abandon is that there are no relativistic effects: it is clear that there is no problem with Rutherford’s acparticle sources: the velocities were about 3 of the velocity of light, However, the scattering of electrons must be treated relativistically, since electrons of sufficient energy for nuclear scattering investigations are relativistic. PROBLEMS 1.8 Dotine the differential cross-section da/df in 2 scattering provess. Derive Ruthetors's ‘formula forthe scattering cross-section ef 2-particles incident with kinetic energy T09 & hhsavy nucleus with cherge Ze a0 _ (Ze come(0) sa Rae, where ¢ is the elactranie charge and 0 is the scattering angle. Under what conditions do deviations from this formola occur? Mustrate your answers by discussing the scettening of ABMeV «particles by thin targets of aluminium (atomic numbar Z=13, atomic weight A~27) and gold (2-79, A= 187). Assume the nucloar radius Ris gen approximately by the formula 24 10-Pm, (Adapt fom the 1968 examination inthe Honour Schaal of Matar Sclence, Physics, Univerity of Ostoea) 1.6 Show that the Rutherford differant scattering cross-section formula can ba wetea ia terms of the squared mamontum tarsfor ga do 42 vartbes? ag ae where a isthe fine-structure constant and vis the velocity of the deltected parc. 1.7 If tno large ongle scatters observed by Rutherford had not boon the stlect of single scattering but of multinle scattering (ses p. 8), how would the veld at fed angle vary with the thickness of the target matariaP In the formar case, neglecting attenuation of the Incident beam. the yild will incxeaso linearly with thickness. What would be the cepen- ddonce for mukipie ecanaring? | {Consider a random walk problom: each small seatte i ike a hop on the surface of a sphere. ‘Sterting at @ pola, n randomly directed small hops will take you 2 distance from the pole. ‘That distance will vary with ezck tial of mops but it has an average over many such wal, How is tha magnitude of that avarage distance expected to dapenc on 1? The cannacted ideas ate those of ofusion and Brownian motion | 1.6 The nuclear constituents The unravelling of the details of atomic structure and of the relation between chemical elements established that the charge (positive) on the nucleus of an atom was Ze, where the integer Z.is the atomic number. the number which gives he number of atomic electrons and hence the ordered position of that species of stom in the periodic table, and e is the magnitude of the charge on the electron. The measurement of atomic masses by the techniques of mass spectroscopy had Pe, of spaco-liko, Z

    You might also like