Beta Decay of Cs137: Understanding Electron Count-Rate Distribution

  • Thread starter Thread starter maroon
  • Start date Start date
maroon
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
I recently performed a Beta-decay experiment for a senior level lab course. I'm expected to write-up a report but I'm fairly confused as to some of the theory surrounding the Beta-decay of Cs137.

This experiment deals solely with negative Beta decay, of which the predominant form (94%) is decay into the meta-stable Ba137, which theoretically has a 2.55 min half-life. This form undergoes internal conversion to Ba137. Only emmitted electrons are being detected by the sensor.

When plotting electron count-rate vs Hall probe voltage (the set-up of this experiment entails the 180 degree deflection of emmitted electrons by way of a variable magnetic field-perpendicular to the movement plane), why is the distribution continuous?

I have a plot consisting of two peaks (both of which I understand why exist-I think), however I don't understand why the count-rate outside these regions is not zero.

Note that "background count" was accounted for, there was sufficient vacuum in the apparatus, and hysterisis (spelling?) was avoided.

I apologize in advance if my description is vague; It would be unreasonable for me to outline the entire lab in a forum post.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Anyone have any thoughts? I feel like I've really hit a wall here..

Thanks
 
Think about the way the detector "sees" an electron. That will tell you why the distribution is continuous.
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top