Calculating Scattered Photon Energy and Recoil Angle in Compton Effect

  • Thread starter Thread starter wolski888
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Compton effect
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on solving a homework problem related to the Compton effect, specifically calculating the energy of a scattered photon, the kinetic energy of a recoiled electron, and the recoil angle. The initial confusion arises from interpreting the scattering process of a 650-keV gamma ray interacting with an electron. The Compton effect equation is utilized to find the new wavelength and frequency of the scattered photon, with the initial wavelength derived from the gamma ray's energy. Participants emphasize the importance of using conservation of momentum to determine the recoil angle, suggesting that the angle should be reconsidered based on momentum rather than energy alone. The conversation highlights the need for clarity in applying the relevant physics principles to arrive at the correct solution.
wolski888
Messages
25
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


A 650-keV gamma ray Compton-scatters from an electron. Find the energy of the photon scattered at 110°, the kinetic energy of the scattered electron, and the recoil angle of the electron.

Homework Equations


Compton effect equation:
Δλ = λ^{'} - λ = (h/mc) (1-cosθ)

Conservation of Energy:
hf + mc^{2} = hf^{'} + E_{e}

hf is initial photon energy, mc^{2} is electron energy before scattering, hf^{'} is the energy of scattered photon with new frequency f prime, and E_{e} is the energy of the recoil electron with mc^2 and Kinetic Energy.

The Attempt at a Solution


First of all I am confused about the question. Are they saying a gamma ray is scattered? Or does a gamma ray hit the electron producing a scattering photon and the electron recoils?

For now, I am thinking that the gamma ray hits the electron (the latter mentioned).

For the recoil angle, I am thinking that it should be 80° since momentum is conserved and so the electron goes in the opposite direction, so 80°.

To find the energy of scattered photon I need to find the new frequency. My thought is that I need to find the new wavelength so that I can use f=c/λ. I can find the new wavelength using Compton Effect equation shown above. I know θ is 110°, and h,m,c are constants. But what about initial λ? Can I get that from the 650-keV? So E = 650-keV = hc/λ using h in terms of eV I can get λ. Right? Now I am all set to find the new wavelength.With that I can find the new frequency, and then find the scattering energy of the photon.

Now I should have all the information to find the Kinetic Energy using the Conservation of energy equation above.

Am I going the right way, any comments would be appreciated. Thanks! :)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
First of all I am confused about the question. Are they saying a gamma ray is scattered? Or does a gamma ray hit the electron producing a scattering photon and the electron recoils?
What's the difference? I don't understand the distinction you're trying to make.

For the recoil angle, I am thinking that it should be 80° since momentum is conserved and so the electron goes in the opposite direction, so 80°.
You'll have to rethink this.

To find the energy of scattered photon I need to find the new frequency. My thought is that I need to find the new wavelength so that I can use f=c/λ. I can find the new wavelength using Compton Effect equation shown above. I know θ is 110°, and h,m,c are constants. But what about initial λ? Can I get that from the 650-keV? So E = 650-keV = hc/λ using h in terms of eV I can get λ. Right? Now I am all set to find the new wavelength.With that I can find the new frequency, and then find the scattering energy of the photon.
Good plan. You don't need to find the frequency though. The equation you already mentioned,
##E = hc/\lambda##, allows you to relate energy to wavelength directly.
 
Forget about the first question then. What do you mean rethink this? Should I use the Kinetic Energy of the recoiled electron to determine the angle?

EDIT: Or should I use conservation of momentum?
 
You need to use momentum. Energy doesn't have a direction whereas momentum does.
 
Many thanks! I'll get to it then.
 
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Back
Top