What Determines the Critical Radius for Fission in Nuclear Physics?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Pi-Bond
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Fission Radius
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on determining the critical radius for fission in nuclear physics, focusing on the probability of a neutron interacting with material. The key equation involves the probability of a neutron not escaping without a reaction, represented by 1 - exp(- (σ_f + σ_c) nr). Participants clarify that the total cross section appears in the exponent due to the additive nature of different reaction cross sections. The conversation emphasizes understanding the probability of fission from the overall interaction probabilities. This highlights the importance of correctly interpreting the equations related to neutron behavior in nuclear reactions.
Pi-Bond
Messages
300
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


See the image below:
qncs.png


Homework Equations


In the previous part, it was proved that a particle moves through a distance x in a material without interacting with probability P given by

P=\exp(-\sigma n x)

Here σ represents the cross section of the reaction between the incoming particle and the material. n represents the target (material) particles per unit volume.

The Attempt at a Solution


The only thing I have figured out so far is that we need the probability of the neutron not escaping without a reaction, so there is a factor of

1- exp(- (\sigma_f + \sigma_c) nr )

in the equation.

I am not sure of where the fractional factor at the start of the equation comes from, or why the total cross section appears in the exponent.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Bump! Does no one have any ideas, I haven't been able to solve this since the last post.
 
The sum in the exponent is simple: it is because cross-sections of different reactions are additive.

Thus (1 - exp) is the probability that the neutron will be captured or cause fission. You need to express from this the probability of fission.
 
Simple explanation! Looks like I wasn't thinking the right way, thanks.
 
Thread 'Help with Time-Independent Perturbation Theory "Good" States Proof'
(Disclaimer: this is not a HW question. I am self-studying, and this felt like the type of question I've seen in this forum. If there is somewhere better for me to share this doubt, please let me know and I'll transfer it right away.) I am currently reviewing Chapter 7 of Introduction to QM by Griffiths. I have been stuck for an hour or so trying to understand the last paragraph of this proof (pls check the attached file). It claims that we can express Ψ_{γ}(0) as a linear combination of...
Back
Top