Excitation levels and Nucleus Size

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the methods for determining the radius of a nucleus using excitation levels and compares this approach to the traditional formula r = r0A^(1/3). Participants explore the implications of using excitation energy in calculations and the relationship between excitation levels and nuclear size.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • One participant inquires about using excitation levels to find nuclear radius and how it contrasts with the r = r0A^(1/3) formula.
  • Another participant suggests applying Heisenberg's uncertainty principle to relate excitation energy to position uncertainty.
  • Calculations for the radius of the nucleus of oxygen-17 using both methods are presented, yielding differing results.
  • One participant notes that the excitation energy must account for the ground state energy, leading to a revised calculation.
  • There is a discussion about the implications of the ground state energy being lower than the excitation energy and its effect on calculations.
  • Participants express confusion over the results, particularly regarding the size discrepancies between calculated values and expected nuclear radii.
  • One participant mentions that the uncertainty principle provides a lower limit for position uncertainty and discusses the implications of using it for precise measurements.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the validity of using excitation levels to determine nuclear radius, as differing calculations yield varying results. There is ongoing debate about the implications of ground state energy and the application of the uncertainty principle.

Contextual Notes

Participants express uncertainty regarding the assumptions made in their calculations, particularly about the ground state energy and the interpretation of excitation energy. The discussion also highlights the limitations of the methods used and the need for clarity on definitions and values.

genloz
Messages
72
Reaction score
1
How would you use excitation levels (or the lowest excitation level) to find the radius of a nucleus? And how would it differ to using the r=r0A^(1/3) formula?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Is it possible to use Heisenberg again?
eg.
[tex]\Delta x \Delta p \approx \hbar[/tex]
[tex]\Delta x \approx \frac{\hbar}{\sqrt{2mE}}[/tex]

so subbing in the excitation level for E and the A value for m?
 
Have you tried?
 
Well, for:
[tex]^{17}O[/tex] (oxygen)
[tex]r=r_{0}A^{1/3}[/tex]
[tex]r=1.3*17^{1/3}=3.34[/tex]

and using the other way:
[tex]\Delta x=\frac{\hbar}{\sqrt{2mE}}[/tex]
Knowing that the first excitation level of 17-oxygen is 3055keV
[tex]\Delta x=\frac{0.197}{\sqrt{2*17*3055}}[/tex]
[tex]\Delta x=6.11*10^{-4}[/tex] units?? m I guess?

Clearly not the same...
 
Strange, I got 6.34*10^(-16) m for [tex]\Delta x[/tex]...

The thing by using excitation energy is that you must know the energy of the ground state, 3055keV is just the delta E, not E of that level.
 
Okay, so if the base level is 870keV, then the total excitation energy is 3055+870=3925... If we say 17u = 6*mp+8*mn+6*me then we arrive at:
[tex]\Delta x = \frac{197 MeV fm}{\sqrt{2*(6*938.8+8*939.7+6*0.511)*3.925}}[/tex]
[tex]\Delta x = \frac{197 MeV fm}{\sqrt{2*(6*938.8MeV+8*939.7MeV+6*0.511MeV)*3.925MeV}}[/tex]
[tex]\Delta x = 0.613 fm[/tex]
Far too small...
 
Sounds very strange that the ground energy is smaller than its excitation energy.
But any way, the higher the energy, the smaller deltaX.
 
Okay, I think I get it.. the mass is only 938.8 or 939.7 because only 1 nucleon is excited, yeah? and the E is the actual value of the excitation, not the difference between excitation and ground state... so that:
[tex]\Delta x = \frac{197 MeV fm}{\sqrt{2*938.8*3.055}}[/tex]
[tex]\Delta x = 2.6fm[/tex]
Which is still much smaller than 3.34... any reason for that?
 
HUP gives lower limit.

And also the deltaX should be the smallest cube-length that a particle with momenta (2mE)^½ can be contained in.

If we could get exact numbers with HUP, then we would use it instead of scattering and so on.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
5K
Replies
37
Views
7K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K