How can I eliminate phi and u to derive the Compton effect equation?

b2386
Messages
34
Reaction score
0
Hi everyone,

Right now, I am working on a homework problem asking me to derive the Compton effect, which is given by \lambda\prime-\lambda=\frac{h}{m_ec}(1-cos\theta)

A diagram of the situation can be found here: http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/quantum/compton.html#c1 (However, in my diagram, the recoil electron and scattered photon are switched with the electron and \phi below the x-axis and the photon and \theta above the x axis.)

To derive the equation, I use the momentum conservation equations and energy conservation equation.

There are two equations for the momentum, one for the x component and one for the y component:

x-component: \frac{h}{\lambda}=\frac{h}{\lambda\prime}cos\theta+\gamma m u cos\phi

y-component: 0=\frac{h}{\lambda\prime}sin\theta-\gamma mu sin\phi

where \gamma=\frac{1}{\sqrt{1-\frac{u^2}{c^2}}}
m=electron mass
u=electron velocity after the collision

My equation for energy conservation is:

h\frac{c}{\lambda}+mc^2=h\frac{c}{\lambda\prime}+\gamma m c^2


To start off, I solved the x component of the momentum for cos(phi) and the y component for sin(phi). I then added the equations together and got (since sin^2 + cos^2 = 1):

\frac{h^2}{\lambda\prime^2\gamma^2m^2u^2}+\frac{h^2}{\lambda^2\gamma^2m^2u^2}-\frac{2h^2cos\theta}{\lambda\prime\lambda\gamma^2m^2u^2}=1

At this point, I am to now eliminate u using the resulting equation and the equation for the energy conservation as given above. However, I am stuck on this next step because it seems as though any algabraic manipulation I try makes the equation extremely complicated. Could anyone please give me some hints as to what step should be next?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
The easy way to do it is (in natural units):
1. Conservation of 4-momentum is k-k'=p'-p, where p=(m;0).
2. Square each 4-vector, getting 2kk'(1-cos)=2mE'-2m^2.
3. Conservation of energy is E'-m=k-k', so kk'(1-cos)=m(k-k').
4. Divide by kk' and use lambda=2pi/k. Put in hbar/c if you want.
 
Thanks for your replies. However, in the problem wording, it specifically tells us to start by eliminating "phi" first and then eliminate "u" from the 3equations. I have a hunch that this will be accomplished by substituting

in \frac{1}{\sqrt{1-\frac{u^2}{c^2}}} for \gamma. This eliminates gamma and also results in more "u"s, which may allow me to cancel them out. It's just getting to that point that is the problem.
 
b2386 said:
Thanks for your replies. However, in the problem wording, it specifically tells us to start by eliminating "phi" first and then eliminate "u" from the 3equations. I have a hunch that this will be accomplished by substituting

in \frac{1}{\sqrt{1-\frac{u^2}{c^2}}} for \gamma. This eliminates gamma and also results in more "u"s, which may allow me to cancel them out. It's just getting to that point that is the problem.
The link I posted outlines the approach that will get you there. The key is to express the electron energy in terms of its momentum and rest energy instead of the representation you used. Solve your last equation and the energy equation for momentum squared and set them equal. With a bit of Algebra many terms will cancel and you will have the result.
 
Last edited:
b2386 said:
Thanks for your replies. However, in the problem wording, it specifically tells us to start by eliminating "phi" first and then eliminate "u" from the 3equations.
Who would tell you to do it that way?
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top