E' vs. E_2 Neutron Scattering and Logarithmic Energy Loss

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the interpretation of equations related to neutron scattering, specifically the differences between the notations E' and E_2 in the context of energy loss during collisions with U-238 atoms. Participants explore the implications of these notations on the calculation of the number of collisions and average energy loss, focusing on the theoretical aspects of elastic scattering.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion over the notation used in the equations provided by their professor, specifically questioning the equivalence of E' and E_2 in the context of neutron energy loss.
  • Another participant argues that the difference in notation is merely a matter of semantics, suggesting that the core concept remains unchanged regardless of how the energies are labeled.
  • A third participant clarifies that in their reference text, E' specifically denotes elastic scattering energy, implying that E_2 is not equivalent to E' in this context.
  • Further elaboration is provided on the relationship between E and E' in terms of scattering angles and the mass of target nuclei, indicating that the average scattering energy can be derived from integrating over angles.
  • Participants reference external materials to support their arguments and provide additional context for the equations discussed.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on whether E' and E_2 can be considered equivalent. There are competing views regarding the implications of the notation on the physics involved, with some asserting a clear distinction while others suggest it is a trivial difference.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved assumptions regarding the definitions of E' and E_2, as well as the conditions under which the equations apply. The discussion highlights the potential for confusion arising from the use of different notations in different contexts.

PlasMav
Messages
9
Reaction score
2
Hello,

I just had a little debate with my professor after taking my final exam. He had given us an additional formula sheet at the last second (hand written on the projector) which confused me.

The question was a 7 MeV neutron collides with several U-238 atoms before reaching 2 MeV. How many collisions did it take to get there and what was the average loss.

So one of the equations he gave us was:

n = ln(E/E')/zeta

This equation confused me enough to screw up most of the problem. Afterward I looked it up and the correct equation is:

n = ln(E_1/E_2)/zeta

Which makes more sense to me but he argued they are the same thing. I am familiar with E' being elastic scattering with needs angles to solve (based on the formula sheet given to us) which is what messed me up.

Does my argument have a foundation?
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
PlasMav said:
Does my argument have a foundation?

It doesn't look like it to me. It looks like you are just quibbling over notation. The point is that you take the logarithm of the ratio of energies before and after. Whether you call those energies ##E## and ##E'## or ##E_1## and ##E_2## is a matter of notation and has nothing to do with the physics. Which seems to be what your professor was saying.
 
In our text which is what he references E' is something different: the elastic scattering energy

Reference:

This was mostly the same as our question:
k48c49.png


Question more involving E':
2ry3d51.png


I was using the E' formula for the first one because the formula the professor provided was:

n = ln(E_1/E_2)/zeta

instead of:

n = ln(E/E')/zeta

E_2 is not the same as E' here.
 

Attachments

  • k48c49.png
    k48c49.png
    27.4 KB · Views: 975
  • 2ry3d51.png
    2ry3d51.png
    43.2 KB · Views: 768
PlasMav said:
In our text which is what he references E' is something different: the elastic scattering energy

I was using the E' formula for the first one because the formula the professor provided was:

n = ln(E_1/E_2)/zeta

instead of:

n = ln(E/E')/zeta

E_2 is not the same as E' here.
I suppose it is confusing for one to use E and E' in one case, usually the energy before collision and energy after collision, respectively, for a single collision, then for successive multiple collisions. In the context of the exercise, one can assume that one collision, or successive collisions are all elastic. For one collision, there is a defined relationship between E' and E in terms of the mass of the target nuclei and the scattering angle, and one could determine an average scattering energy by integrating over all angles. See equation (26) in the following link.

See some notes here: http://mragheb.com/NPRE 402 ME 405 Nuclear Power Engineering/Neutron Collision Theory.pdf

E and E' are variables, whereas E1 and E2 are particular values, and one could simply say, solve the problem when E = E1 and E' = E2, to which PeterDonis alluded. See equations (31) and (37) in the above link (and note E' and E'' are duplicated in the text before eq (37)).

It would be useful to work through the derivations and become comfortable with the theory.

Other notes - https://www.ncnr.nist.gov/staff/hammouda/distance_learning/chapter_6.pdf - warning: they use bright yellow highlight.
 

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
4K