Compton scattering: electron absorbs then emits a photon?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the mechanics of Compton scattering, specifically whether an electron absorbs a photon and then emits another photon with different energy. Participants explore the implications of quantum mechanics on this process, addressing concepts such as energy absorption, wavefunctions, and the nature of interactions between photons and electrons.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that the electron absorbs a photon and then emits another photon of different energy, questioning how a fraction of the photon's energy can be absorbed, which seems forbidden in quantum mechanics.
  • Others argue that the description of absorption and re-emission is overly simplistic, suggesting that a two-particle wavefunction better represents the scenario, where energies are not definite during the collision.
  • A participant mentions that the derivation of the wavelength shift in Compton scattering relies on entrance and exit energies and momenta, without needing a detailed understanding of the interaction.
  • Another viewpoint suggests that traditional Compton scattering involves free particles, while interactions with bound electrons in atoms require different methods.
  • Some participants discuss the dynamics of electron-photon interactions, noting the existence of different types of interactions in non-relativistic descriptions.
  • One participant highlights the historical context of Compton's observations, noting that the original experiments involved bound electrons, which complicates the interpretation of energy absorption.
  • There is a mention of Doppler shift affecting the frequency of the scattered photon due to the motion of the electron.
  • Another participant asserts that all of the photon's energy is absorbed by the electron, with part of it used to eject the electron and the rest released as a photon, leading to a change in wavelength.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express multiple competing views regarding the nature of energy absorption and emission in Compton scattering, with no consensus reached on the specifics of the interaction or the implications of quantum mechanics.

Contextual Notes

Some discussions highlight the limitations of traditional definitions of Compton scattering, particularly in relation to bound versus free electrons, and the complexity of interactions that may not be fully captured by simplified models.

Physicist
Messages
43
Reaction score
0
Hello,

In Compton scattering, does the electron absorbs a photon and then emit another photon with another energy??

I couldn't understand how would the electron absorb a FRACTION of the photon's energy which is forbidden in QM.

Regards
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Physicist said:
In Compton scattering, does the electron absorbs a photon and then emit another photon with another energy??

I couldn't understand how would the electron absorb a FRACTION of the photon's energy which is forbidden in QM.

Like everywhere else in quantum mechanics, Compton scattering can be described in terms of a wavefunction evolving in time. In a fair approximation, this can be a two-particle wavefunction in this case. Individual energies of the electron and the photon are usually fixed in the remote past. However, these energies are no longer definite at the time of collision and in the remote future (when scattering cross-sections are measured). They are described by the wavefunction which spreads over a wide range of particle energies. So, your description "the electron absorbs a photon and then emits another photon with another energy" is too simplistic.

Eugene.
 
Physicist said:
In Compton scattering, does the electron absorbs a photon and then emit another photon with another energy??

The derivation of wavelength shift in Compton scattering uses only the entrance and exit energies and momenta. It does not require a detailed understanding of the interaction. But the Feynman diagrams show an absorption and a re-emission.
 
country boy said:
The derivation of wavelength shift in Compton scattering uses only the entrance and exit energies and momenta. It does not require a detailed understanding of the interaction. But the Feynman diagrams show an absorption and a re-emission.

This is true, because the S-matrix formalism of QFT (which uses Feynman diagrams) is a simplified description of reality. In this formalism we care only about entrance and exit states, and don't ask about what happens in the middle. This simplification is a good match for scattering experiments in high energy physics. However, we shouldn't forget that between entrance and exit states the system undergoes some non-trivial time evolution. This time evolution is not accessible by modern experimental techniques, but it may be accessible in the future.

Eugene.
 
Aren't you cracking eggs with sledgehammers here? I haven't treated compton scattering using the wavefunction yet but to my knowledge what happens is an electron in an atom absorbs a photon and rises a few energy levels, and then releases a photon of a different energy by moving down one or more energy levels but not to the ground state (which it eventually reaches by emitting more photons).

Is this wrong?
 
The electron is ejected from the atom, and the photon is scattered (or re-emitted) with a lower energy (longer wavelength). Other electrons then fall into lower energy levels and they emit photons. The ejected electron is usually absorbed by another atom where it happens to stop after slowing down.
 
Just some guy said:
Aren't you cracking eggs with sledgehammers here? I haven't treated compton scattering using the wavefunction yet but to my knowledge what happens is an electron in an atom absorbs a photon and rises a few energy levels, and then releases a photon of a different energy by moving down one or more energy levels but not to the ground state (which it eventually reaches by emitting more photons).

Is this wrong?

As far as I know, the traditional definition of Compton scattering involves two free particles - the photon and the electron. It is not about the photon interacting with an electron bound in an atom. The latter interaction should be treated by very different methods, of course.

Eugene.
 
meopemuk said:
As far as I know, the traditional definition of Compton scattering involves two free particles

traditionally, yeah. but a lot of people call many types of electron-photon scattering "compton." For example, some people I know who do NRIX (non-resonant inelastic x-ray scattering) call the scattering off of valence electrons "valence compton." Etc.

Anyways, to get back to what the original post was regarding. The kinematics are pretty easy, but it's the dynamics that are interesting: In a non-relativistic description of the electron there are actually two types of interaction. An interaction whose diagram looks like the standard QED vertex (but is different) where two electron lines and one photon line meet, and an interaction whose diagram looks like two electron lines and two photon lines all meeting at the same place. I believe that it is the latter diagram which gives rise to free electron compton. See, for example:

Eisenberger and Platzman, "compton scattering of x-rays from bound electrons", Phys. Rev. A, vol. 2, p. 415.
 
Arthur H. Compton observed the scattering of x-rays from electrons in a carbon target and found scattered x-rays with a longer wavelength than those incident upon the target.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/quantum/comptint.html

The original experimental observations were based on bound electrons in carbon atoms. The binding energies of those electrons is in the eV range as opposed to keV energies of photons. Therefore one could treat the electrons as essentially free. Compton was apparently looking at X-ray diffraction among other things.

Of course, if an X-ray or gamma-ray scatters off a K or L electron in a much heavier element, then the binding energy is significant.

See also - http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1927/index.html
http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1927/compton-lecture.html

or http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1927/compton-lecture.pdf (the discussion of the Compton effect begins on page 10 of the pdf file)
 
Last edited:
  • #10
Astronuc said:
as opposed to keV energies of electrons.

You probably wanted to say: as opposed to keV energies of photons.

Eugene.
 
Last edited:
  • #11
meopemuk said:
You probably wanted to say: as opposed to keV energies of electrons.

Eugene.
Corrected it. Thanks! :redface:
 
  • #12
Physicist said:
Hello,

In Compton scattering, does the electron absorbs a photon and then emit another photon with another energy??

I couldn't understand how would the electron absorb a FRACTION of the photon's energy which is forbidden in QM.

Regards
You could also see things in this (simplistic) way: because of Doppler shift, the frequency of the scattered photon is reduced because it starts from a moving frame (the pushed electron).
A photon's energy infact depends on the ref. frame, that is: the relative speed of source and observer.
 
Last edited:
  • #13
Well actually, all of the photon is absorbed by the electron. Some of the energy from the photon is used to remove the electron from the atom and its kinetic energy. The rest is released by the electron. Since E = hc/wavelength, lower energy in the released photon changes its wavelength.
 
  • #14
sheepandgoat said:
Well actually, all of the photon is absorbed by the electron. Some of the energy from the photon is used to remove the electron from the atom and its kinetic energy. The rest is released by the electron. Since E = hc/wavelength, lower energy in the released photon changes its wavelength.
Then what <br /> \Delta \lambda<br /> stands for in the Compton's formula?
 

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K