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

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the proposal of an alternate model for muonic helium, specifically involving a helium nucleus with one electron and one muon. Participants explore the implications of this model, including the mass ratios of the particles and the validity of certain approximations in quantum mechanics.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant proposes modeling a helium nucleus with one electron and one muon, questioning whether the muon's mass is small enough to approximate a stationary center.
  • Another participant suggests that if gravity is the concern, the nucleus can be assumed stationary due to the large relative distances involved.
  • Some participants reference the Born-Oppenheimer approximation, indicating it holds well under the proposed circumstances.
  • A challenge is raised regarding the concept of 'orbits' for electrons or muons, emphasizing that they do not have well-defined distances from the nucleus and that gravitational forces are negligible compared to electromagnetic forces.
  • A participant shares their intention to explore the physics of the model without prior reading of referenced articles, indicating a desire for independent exploration.
  • One participant presents a detailed mathematical formulation of the Schrödinger equation for the system, outlining their approach to treat it as two two-body problems and providing expressions for the wave functions involved.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

The discussion contains multiple competing views, particularly regarding the assumptions about particle behavior and the validity of certain approximations. There is no consensus on the implications of the proposed model or the correctness of the assumptions made.

Contextual Notes

Participants express uncertainty about the implications of mass ratios and the applicability of various approximations, such as the Born-Oppenheimer approximation. The discussion also highlights the complexity of modeling interactions in this system.

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
5K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
  • · 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
11K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
10K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K