Coulomb correction for beta decay spectrum

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the Coulomb correction for the beta decay spectrum, specifically addressing the expression used to account for the Coulomb effect of the nucleus on the emitted beta particle. Participants explore the implications of using different unit systems (SI vs. CGS) and the resulting effects on the calculations involved.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents a formula for the Coulomb correction, F(Z,E), and expresses confusion over obtaining nonsensical values due to a small n when using SI units.
  • Another participant suggests an alternative expression for n, relating it to the fine structure constant and the speed of the beta particle, leading to a different value for F.
  • A participant notes the need to include a factor of 4*Pi*epsilon in SI units, indicating a potential source of confusion stemming from unit differences.
  • Further clarification is provided regarding the dimensionality of charge in different unit systems, emphasizing the necessity of dividing by epsilon_0 in SI to achieve a dimensionless quantity.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the need to consider unit systems in their calculations, but there is no consensus on the correct formula or the implications of these unit differences for the Coulomb correction.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved issues regarding the assumptions made in the original textbook and how they relate to modern unit conventions. The discussion highlights the importance of understanding the context in which formulas were derived.

statphys
Messages
18
Reaction score
0
Hello

I am re-reading some of my old textbooks and have come across a simplified (non-relativistic) term used to correct the beta decay spectrum for the coulomb effect of the nucleus on the ejected beta particle. The expression is;
F(Z,E) = (2*Pi*n) / (1 - exp(-2*Pi*n))
where n = (Z*e*e)/(hbar*v)
Z= atomic no of daughter nucleus
e= charge of the electron
hbar = Plancks constant (divided by 2 Pi)
v= speed of the electron

Using SI values for each of the constants and assuming Z is 50 and that the speed of the beta particle is 10% of the speed of light I get a really small number for n and hence non-sensical values for F(Z,E).

The book I am using is "Theoretical Nuclear Physics" by Blatt and Weisskopf which is circa 1955 so perhaps there is an issue with units? Any help sorting out this issue would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I have a source that gives n = Z*alpha/beta, where alpha is 1/137 and beta is v/c. For Z=50 and the particle at 10% the speed of light, that gives n=3.6 and F~23.

If n were to be really small, F=2*pi*n/(1-exp(-2*pi*n)) ~ 2*pi*n/(2*pi*n-(2*pi*n)^2/2) ~ 1 + pi*n.
 
hamster143 said:
I have a source that gives n = Z*alpha/beta, where alpha is 1/137 and beta is v/c. For Z=50 and the particle at 10% the speed of light, that gives n=3.6 and F~23.

If n were to be really small, F=2*pi*n/(1-exp(-2*pi*n)) ~ 2*pi*n/(2*pi*n-(2*pi*n)^2/2) ~ 1 + pi*n.

Hi Hamster

Thanks for the reply. I think what you have is more or less consistent with the expression I stated. The value you quote for alpha looks to be the fine structure constant, which is defined in textbooks as
e^2/(hbar*c)
where c = speed of light
trouble is with SI units for everything the equation needs to be divided by 4*Pi*epsilon
where epsilon = 8.8542E-12 and is known as the permittivity of free space.

What is really confusing me is that my old textbook doesn't mention this extra factor and I was wondering whether there has been some subtle change of units involved since this textbook was written - any old physicists out there got any clues?
 
statphys said:
trouble is with SI units for everything the equation needs to be divided by 4*Pi*epsilon
where epsilon = 8.8542E-12 and is known as the permittivity of free space.

Check to see if the book is using http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaussian_units" , or some other variant of cgs units. That's often the cause of missing factors of 4*Pi*epsilon_0 compared to SI units, although I don't know off the top of my head what the correct formula should be in your case.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Right, if you work in SI, you need an extra term of epsilon_0 to get things right. In CGS/Gaussian, charge has dimensionality that's expressed through other units and the expression (Z*e*e)/(hbar*v) can be dimensionless. In SI, the same equation is not dimensionless because you have two powers of coulomb (or ampere) and nothing to balance them. You need to divide by epsilon_0 to get a dimensionless quantity.
 
Thanks house and hamster that's cleared up that little mystery for me.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
5K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
12K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
5K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K