Calculation of the Natural Linewidth

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter blaisem
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Calculation Natural
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the calculation of the natural linewidth for a sodium transition at 589.1 nm. Participants explore the relationship between transition energy, lifetime, and natural broadening, referencing different sources and formulas.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion about determining the natural linewidth without knowing the lifetime of the transition and questions the relevance of the transition energy.
  • Another participant notes that discrepancies may arise from considering finite lifetimes for both initial and final states.
  • A participant cites a formula from Hyperphysics relating energy and linewidth, leading to different gamma values based on the energy and lifetime used.
  • Questions are raised about whether the transition energy or the absolute energy uncertainty should be used in calculations.
  • Concerns are expressed regarding the complexity of the formula in the PowerPoint compared to Hyperphysics, suggesting that the latter may provide a more superficial description of natural broadening.
  • Clarifications are made that the uncertainty in energy, rather than the transition energy itself, should be used in the calculations.
  • It is suggested that both the initial and final states' lifetimes must be considered for accurate linewidth determination.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the correct approach to determining natural linewidth, with multiple competing views on the relevance of transition energy and the appropriate formulas to use.

Contextual Notes

Participants mention various sources and formulas, indicating potential limitations in the assumptions made regarding lifetimes and energy uncertainties. The discussion highlights the complexity of the topic and the need for careful consideration of definitions and parameters involved.

blaisem
Messages
28
Reaction score
2
Hi, I am trying to understand how one determines the natural linewidth. On my assignment, I am only given an energy (589.1 nm transition in sodium). I have two sources that I have found that seem to contradict each other:

Source 1: Slides 5 and 6

Source 2: Hyperphysics

If I plug in either the lifetime or the energy value provided in the example from the powerpoint (slide 6) into the Hyperphysics calculator, the corresponding value isn't consistent with slide 6.

I am confused on which is the correct formula, as well as how one determines the natural linewidth without knowing the lifetime of a transition. Is the energy of the transition actually relevant?

Can anyone please advise? Thank you for your time and help.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
blaisem said:
If I plug in either the lifetime or the energy value provided in the example from the powerpoint (slide 6) into the Hyperphysics calculator, the corresponding value isn't consistent with slide 6.
I didn't check the calculations in detail, but in the slides, both the initial and final states are considered to have finite lifetimes. This may be the source of the discrepancy.

blaisem said:
how one determines the natural linewidth without knowing the lifetime of a transition.
They are usually measured from spectra.

If you need the numbers for sodium, check http://steck.us/alkalidata/.
 
Hi DrClaude. Thanks for your response and the link. Maybe it was implied I had to look up the lifetime. 3 questions, if you have time, since I am having trouble wrapping my head around it conceptually:

1.Hyperphysics provides a relationship of:

2E = Gamma = (reduced plank constant / lifetime)​

where Gamma is the width of the natural broadening

If I substitute the given transition energy of 589.1 nm into E, I get a gamma of 4.2 eV; if I use the lifetime from your source (16.2 ns), I get a gamma of 41 nano Ev.

I am confused about the role of the energy of the transition in natural broadening. Am I substituting the wrong value for energy into the Hyperphysics formula?

2. What would be the correct value of E? Would it be the absolute energy uncertainty of the initial state, and the transition energy I have is entirely irrelevant to determining the natural linewidth?

3. Is the formula in the powerpoint (first link) more precise than Hyperphysics? It seems to be a more complicated representation of natural broadening, implying that the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle as it was presented in Hyperphysics may be a more superficial description of natural broadening. Is my understanding of this correct?

Thanks a lot for your advise!
 
Last edited:
blaisem said:
If I substitute the given transition energy of 589.1 nm into E, I get a gamma of 4.2 eV; if I use the lifetime from your source (16.2 ns), I get a gamma of 41 nano Ev.

I am confused about the role of the energy of the transition in natural broadening. Am I substituting the wrong value for energy into the Hyperphysics formula?
Yes. In the formula, it is ##\Delta E##, the uncertainty on the energy, not the energy of the transition.

blaisem said:
2. What would be the correct value of E? Would it be the absolute energy uncertainty of the initial state, and the transition energy I have is entirely irrelevant to determining the natural linewidth?
If both the initial and final states have finite lifetimes, then both widths must be taken into account (as described in the slides). You have an uncertainty in both the energy of the upper state and the lower state. But the actual value of the center of the peak (the energy "before" taking into account the uncertainty) is not relevant.

blaisem said:
3. Is the formula in the powerpoint (first link) more precise than Hyperphysics? It seems to be a more complicated representation of natural broadening, implying that the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle as it was presented in Hyperphysics may be a more superficial description of natural broadening. Is my understanding of this correct?
Apart from the fact that it takes into account the uncertainty of the energy of the final state, I do not see any difference between the two approaches. The Hyperphysics formulation might be simplified because most of the time the final state is the ground state, which has no uncertainty.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 62 ·
3
Replies
62
Views
12K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K