Can an alternate Muonic Helium model be created with one electron and one muon?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter jfy4
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Helium
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion focuses on modeling an alternate Muonic Helium atom consisting of one electron and one muon orbiting a helium nucleus. The mass ratio between the muon and the helium nucleus is approximately 3%, allowing for the assumption of a stationary nucleus under the Born-Oppenheimer approximation. The participants emphasize that the particles are distinguishable due to their opposite spins, and they discuss the implications of gravitational forces being negligible compared to electromagnetic forces. The Schrödinger equation is presented, along with a method for solving the two-body problems associated with the muon and electron interactions.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quantum mechanics, specifically the Schrödinger equation
  • Familiarity with the Born-Oppenheimer approximation
  • Knowledge of particle physics, particularly muons and electrons
  • Basic concepts of distinguishable and indistinguishable particles in quantum systems
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the Born-Oppenheimer approximation in greater detail
  • Study the derivation and applications of the Schrödinger equation in multi-particle systems
  • Explore the properties and behaviors of muons compared to electrons in quantum mechanics
  • Investigate perturbation theory and its application to quantum systems
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, graduate students in quantum mechanics, and researchers interested in particle physics and atomic models will benefit from this discussion.

jfy4
Messages
645
Reaction score
3
Hi,

I would like to model an alternate to Muonic helium, and I need some help. I got this idea from a professor of mine who mentioned it off hand in a lecture. The idea is the following:

Model a helium nucleus with one electron, and one muon.

This would have two fermions "orbiting" however, the particles are distinguishable and so none of the indistinguishably ideas around the electrons in the atom would apply.

One of my first question is this: The muon is considerably more massive than the electron, the ratio of mass between the nucleus and the muon is 1 m_\mu is 0.0283466 times smaller than 1 m_\alpha. So the muon is \approx 3\% the mass of a helium nucleus. Is this small enough to still approximate a stationary center?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If you are referring to gravity as moving the nucleus then you may assume so. Seeing as the relative distance from the nucleus to the the first orbit is incredibly large, gravity would not have an effect on the nucleus.
 
Well, your professor probably mentioned it due to the fact there was an http://www.sciencemag.org/content/331/6016/448" .
The ground-state is a singlet, so as far as that's concerned, the two particles are distinguishable anyway, since they've got opposite spin.

As for your question: Yes, the Born-Oppenheimer approximation was found to hold up well under the circumstances.

Zush: What on Earth are you on about? Electrons (or muons) don't have 'orbits', nor stay at any well-defined distance from the nucleus. And the gravitational attraction is over 50 orders of magnitude smaller than the electromagnetic force between the particles.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
alxm said:
Well, your professor probably mentioned it due to the fact there was an http://www.sciencemag.org/content/331/6016/448" .
The ground-state is a singlet, so as far as that's concerned, the two particles are distinguishable anyway, since they've got opposite spin.

As for your question: Yes, the Born-Oppenheimer approximation was found to hold up well under the circumstances.

Zush: What on Earth are you on about? Electrons (or muons) don't have 'orbits', nor stay at any well-defined distance from the nucleus. And the gravitational attraction is over 50 orders of magnitude smaller than the electromagnetic force between the particles.

Wow, thanks for this article. Do you think anyone will mind If I try and do this without reading the article first, as an exercise. See if I can do physics without seeing it first.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I decided to assume that the nucleus was stationary. The Schrödinger equation is then

-\frac{\hbar^2}{2m_\mu}\nabla^{2}_{\mu}\Psi(\vec{r}_\mu, \vec{r}_e) -\frac{\hbar^2}{2m_e}\nabla^{2}_{e}\Psi(\vec{r}_\mu, \vec{r}_e)+ke^2\left(-\frac{Z}{r_e}-\frac{Z}{r_\mu}+\frac{1}{r_{e\mu}}\right)\Psi(\vec{r}_\mu, \vec{r}_e)=\hat{E}\Psi(\vec{r}_\mu, \vec{r}_e).

I'm going to take

H&#039;=\frac{ke^2}{r_e\mu}[/itex]<br /> <br /> as the perturbation and then divide the wave function into two parts<br /> <br /> \Psi(\vec{r}_\mu, \vec{r}_e)=\psi(\vec{r}_\mu)\phi(\vec{r}_e).[/itex]&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt; and write \hat{E}=\hat{E}_\mu+\hat{E}_e.&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt; I&amp;#039;m then going to treat this as two, two-body problems with the Helium nucleus and the Muon, and the Helium nucleus and the electron. Both of these problems have the normal hydrogenic wave function solution&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt; \Phi_{nlm}(r,\theta,\phi)=-\left[\frac{4(n-l-1)!}{(na_0)^3n\left[(n+l)!\right]^3}\right]^{1/2}\rho^l L_{n+l}^{2l+1}(\rho)e^{-\rho/2}Y_{l}^{m}(\theta,\phi)&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt; where \rho=2r/na_0 and a_0=\hbar^2/\bar{\mu} e^2. Here \bar{\mu} is the reduced mass of either one of the systems (I&amp;#039;m running out of symbols...). L_{n+l}^{2l+1}(\rho) and Y_{l}^{m}(\theta,\phi) are the Leguerre polynomials and the Spherical Harmonics respectively. For this Hydrogenic solution, n,l,m,r,\theta,\phi are all dependent on the system, and so are not the same in general for both systems. Then the total unperturbed wave function for the system is&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt; \Psi_{\{n \}}(\vec{r}_\mu , \vec{r}_e)=\psi_{\{n_\mu \} }(\vec{r}_\mu)\phi_{\{n_e \}}(\vec{r}_e).&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt; Here \{n\} is the set of quantum numbers. Then the ground state of this atom is&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt; \Psi_{100,100}(\vec{r}_\mu, \vec{r}_e)=\frac{1}{\pi}\left(a_{0_\mu}a_{0_e}\right)^{-1/2}e^{-(r_\mu/a_{0_\mu}+r_e/a_{0_e})}.&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt; Tomorrow, if everything is fine, I will calculate the first correction to energy and other interesting items. Stay tuned.
 

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
5K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
10K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
10K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K