Derving compton effect formula - SIMPLY

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the difficulty of deriving the Compton effect formula, particularly for someone who struggles with physics concepts. The original poster seeks a detailed explanation but is advised that a full derivation is extensive and similar to textbook content. Participants suggest that understanding special relativity is crucial before attempting the derivation. There is a consensus that without knowing the individual's current knowledge level, providing effective help is challenging. The conversation highlights the importance of foundational physics understanding in tackling complex derivations.
CV101
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
Hi,

I am trying to derive the compton effect formula.

I am not very good at physics, however, I am trying to get better!

WILL YOU PLEASE EXPLAIN EVERYTHING YOU DO!

Thanks- really appreciated!

:smile:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
WILL YOU PLEASE EXPLAIN EVERYTHING YOU DO!
I thought YOU are trying to derive it?
Where did you get problems?

There are many textbooks covering this derivation, you can check them for hints how to do it.
 
Cant follow textbooks

Hi, unfortunately I can't really follow the textbooks- like I said, not very good at physics.

If you could help me out in deriving it, that would be great! thanks
 
mfb said:
Where did you get problems?

Do not expect that someone posts a full derivation here - it is a lot of work, and it would look similar to the derivations in the textbooks, so there is no point in that.

If you don't know the required physics (special relativity), it might be useful if you start learning this first.
 
cool, thanks. Will start my learning what special relativity is. Thanks.

Also, in our lecture course we got told that we should be able to derive this... and so as I couldn't understand more that conservation of momentum, I thought I should ask.
 
https://www.physicsforums.com/blog.php?b=3588

Without knowing what you know and what you don't know, there is no way anyone can present any kind of help. What will inevitably happen is that every time we introduce something which we think you should know, we end up back-tracking because we have to explain that!

Zz.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
So I know that electrons are fundamental, there's no 'material' that makes them up, it's like talking about a colour itself rather than a car or a flower. Now protons and neutrons and quarks and whatever other stuff is there fundamentally, I want someone to kind of teach me these, I have a lot of questions that books might not give the answer in the way I understand. Thanks
I am attempting to use a Raman TruScan with a 785 nm laser to read a material for identification purposes. The material causes too much fluorescence and doesn’t not produce a good signal. However another lab is able to produce a good signal consistently using the same Raman model and sample material. What would be the reason for the different results between instruments?
Back
Top