Change in the energy of photon due to recoil of the nucleus

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the change in photon energy due to the recoil of a nucleus, specifically using non-relativistic calculations. The conservation of linear momentum and kinetic energy equations are applied, leading to the conclusion that the energy of the photon is reduced by 2m eV, where m is the mass of the nucleus. The participants suggest methods to solve the equations more efficiently, including using significant figures and approximations based on the relationship between photon energy and the rest mass energy of the nucleus.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of conservation of momentum and energy principles
  • Familiarity with non-relativistic physics calculations
  • Knowledge of photon energy and mass-energy equivalence
  • Ability to solve quadratic equations symbolically
NEXT STEPS
  • Explore non-relativistic photon energy calculations in depth
  • Learn about the significance of significant figures in physics calculations
  • Study the implications of mass-energy equivalence in nuclear physics
  • Investigate advanced methods for solving quadratic equations in physics
USEFUL FOR

Physics students, educators, and professionals interested in nuclear physics and energy conservation principles, particularly those focusing on photon interactions and recoil effects.

Pushoam
Messages
961
Reaction score
53

Homework Statement


upload_2017-12-22_18-50-7.png


Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution



Since energy of photon is very low compared to the rest mass energy of the nucleus, I consider non – relativistic calculation.

Conservation of linear momentum gives : momentum of nucleus = momentum of photon = p...(1)

Conservation of kinetic energy gives : ## \frac { p^2 c^2}{2mc^2} + pc = 14.4keV ## ...(2)

Solving the above equation gives,

pc = 14.39999806 keV, m = 57 ## m_p ##

So, the energy of the photon gets reduced by 2m eV. Is this correct?
[/B]
 

Attachments

  • upload_2017-12-22_18-50-7.png
    upload_2017-12-22_18-50-7.png
    15.9 KB · Views: 772
Physics news on Phys.org
Your work looks correct. Notice how your method of solving the equation requires keeping a large number of significant figures. There are ways to avoid this.

For example, let ##E = pc## and let ##E_0 = 14.4## kev. So your equation (2) is ##\frac{E^2}{2mc^2} +E = E_0##. Solve this quadratic equation symbolically for ##E##. Then make an approximation before plugging in numbers using the fact that ##E_0 << mc^2##.

Or, rearrange (2) to get ##E_0 - E = \frac{E^2}{2mc^2}##. Since ##E## will be close to ##E_0##, you can let ##E = E_0## on the right hand side to obtain a good approximation for ##E_0 - E##.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Pushoam
TSny said:
Your work looks correct. Notice how your method of solving the equation requires keeping a large number of significant figures. There are ways to avoid this.

For example, let ##E = pc## and let ##E_0 = 14.4## kev. So your equation (2) is ##\frac{E^2}{2mc^2} +E = E_0##. Solve this quadratic equation symbolically for ##E##. Then make an approximation before plugging in numbers using the fact that ##E_0 << mc^2##.

Or, rearrange (2) to get ##E_0 - E = \frac{E^2}{2mc^2}##. Since ##E## will be close to ##E_0##, you can let ##E = E_0## on the right hand side to obtain a good approximation for ##E_0 - E##.

Thanks for the insights. It's easy and clear.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
8K