Form factor - spherically symmetric

  • Thread starter Thread starter Max Eilerson
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Form Symmetric
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on deriving the form factor, F(q), for a proton modeled as a uniform spherical charge distribution with radius R. The expression for F(q) is established using the Fourier transform of the normalized charge distribution, p(r), leading to the integral F(q) = (3eħ²(ħsin(qR/ħ) - qRcos(qR/ħ)))/(q³R³). The participants clarify that the normalized charge distribution implies dividing by the total charge, allowing the charge e to be omitted in certain limits. This results in F(q) simplifying to 1 when qR/ħ is much less than 1.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Fourier transforms in physics
  • Familiarity with charge distributions and Coulomb's law
  • Knowledge of spherical symmetry in charge distributions
  • Basic calculus for evaluating integrals
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the implications of normalized charge distributions in quantum mechanics
  • Learn about the physical significance of form factors in particle physics
  • Explore the derivation of form factors for other particle models
  • Investigate the role of momentum transfer in scattering experiments
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, particularly those specializing in particle physics and quantum mechanics, as well as students seeking to understand the mathematical modeling of charge distributions and form factors.

Max Eilerson
Messages
119
Reaction score
1
1) Use the fact that the form factor, F(q), is the Fourier transform of the normalised charge distribution p(r), which in the spherically symmetric case gives
,

F(q) = \int \frac{4\pi\hbar r}{q}p(r)sin(\frac{qr}{\hbar}) dr

to find an expression for F(q) for a simple model of the proton considered as a uniform spherical charge distribution of radius R.

This just means I can use coulomb's law as an expression for p(r). p(r) = \frac{q}{4\pi\epsilon_0R} ?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: kyawhteinlin
Physics news on Phys.org
Max Eilerson said:
1) Use the fact that the form factor, F(q), is the Fourier transform of the normalised charge distribution p(r), which in the spherically symmetric case gives
,

F(q) = \int \frac{4\pi\hbar r}{q}p(r)sin(\frac{qr}{\hbar}) dr

to find an expression for F(q) for a simple model of the proton considered as a uniform spherical charge distribution of radius R.

This just means I can use coulomb's law as an expression for p(r). p(r) = \frac{q}{4\pi\epsilon_0R} ?
I take this to mean

\rho(r) = \frac{q}{V} = \frac{3q}{4 \pi R^3} for r < R and zero elsewhere.
 
Thanks :). That's is what I was thinking after I posted. Don't see many \epsilon_0 floating around in these things.
 
Last edited:
Max Eilerson said:
This just means I can use coulomb's law as an expression for p(r). p(r) = \frac{q}{4\pi\epsilon_0R} ?
You know it has nothing to do with Coulomb's law.
 
So I evaulated the integral with \rho(r) = \frac{3e}{4 \pi R^3}
q = momentum transfer, e = proton charge.

<br /> \frac{3e\hbar^2(\hbar\sin[\frac{qr}{\hbar}] - qr\cos[\frac{qr}{\hbar}])}{q^3 R^3} + C
Evaluated between R and 0, (F(q) = 0 between R and infinity since p(r) = 0.)


F(q) = \frac{3e\hbar^2(\hbar\sin[\frac{qR}{\hbar}] - qR\cos[\frac{qR}{\hbar}])}{q^3 R^3}

It asks me to show that for \fracq{qR}{\hbar} &lt;&lt; 1 the form factor reduces to 1, I'm not seeing how the charge e can disappear here
 
Last edited:
Max Eilerson said:
So I evaulated the integral with \rho(r) = \frac{3e}{4 \pi R^3}
q = momentum transfer, e = proton charge.

<br /> \frac{3e\hbar^2(\hbar\sin[\frac{qr}{\hbar}] - qr\cos[\frac{qr}{\hbar}])}{q^3 R^3} + C
Evaluated between R and 0, (F(q) = 0 between R and infinity since p(r) = 0.)


F(q) = \frac{3e\hbar^2(\hbar\sin[\frac{qR}{\hbar}] - qR\cos[\frac{qR}{\hbar}])}{q^3 R^3}

It asks me to show that for \fracq{qR}{\hbar} &lt;&lt; 1 the form factor reduces to 1, I'm not seeing how the charge e can disappear here

What does normalised charge distribution mean?

I wonder if that means you should be dividing by a factor something like

\int \rho(r) dr

which would remove the quantity of charge from the calculation
 
OlderDan said:
What does normalised charge distribution mean?

I wonder if that means you should be dividing by a factor something like

\int \rho(r) dr

which would remove the quantity of charge from the calculation


1 = \int \rho(r) d^3r
 
Max Eilerson said:
1 = \int \rho(r) d^3r

I like that even better. I even wrote my integral that way at first and changed it because yours just had the r integral.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
5K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K