How Fast Might a Proton or Neutron Be Moving in an Atomic Nucleus?

  • Thread starter Thread starter hover
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Particle Space
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on calculating the speed and kinetic energy of protons and neutrons confined within an atomic nucleus, specifically a region of approximately 1 femtometer (1 fm). Using the uncertainty principle, the minimum speed of a proton is calculated to be around 31.57 million meters per second (31.57 Mm/s), resulting in a minimum kinetic energy of approximately 8.324E-13 joules. The calculations for neutrons are similar, and the discussion emphasizes the importance of using standard units in scientific communication.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle
  • Basic knowledge of atomic structure and properties
  • Familiarity with kinetic energy calculations
  • Proficiency in unit conversions and SI prefixes
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the Heisenberg uncertainty principle in detail
  • Learn about the properties of protons and neutrons in atomic physics
  • Explore advanced kinetic energy calculations for subatomic particles
  • Research standard units of measurement in physics and their applications
USEFUL FOR

Students in physics, educators teaching atomic structure, and researchers interested in particle physics and quantum mechanics will benefit from this discussion.

hover
Messages
342
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Neutrons and protons in atomic nuclei are confined within a region whose diameter is about
10^-15m = 1 fm

a) At any given instant, how fast might an individual proton or neutron be moving?
b) What is the approximate kinetic energy of a neutron that is localized to within such a region?
c) What would be the corresponding energy of an electron localized to within such a region?

Homework Equations



uncertainty principle
ΔxΔp ≥ h/(4π)

The Attempt at a Solution



I am having trouble visualizing how to go about the problem. I know I need to use the certainty prinicple in some way but I don't know how. I don't know if this is the right way to start but since we are confined to a sphere, would it be proper to apply the uncertainty principle in 3 directions?
Δx*mΔv ≥ h/(4π)
Δy*mΔv ≥ h/(4π)
Δz*mΔv ≥ h/(4π)
Solve for Δv for each direction and then use them to find the total magnitude.
Or am I thinking about this wrong?

If I can understand this then all the parts to this question will be simple.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Approximations using the uncertainty principle are just that. Approximations. I would think you would be ok with doing it in one direction. That should give you a good enough estimate.
 
Ok so I will do everything in one dimension. Working with a proton(the work would be similar for a neutron)

a.)
Δx*mΔv ≥ h/(4π)
Δv ≥ h/(4π*m*Δx)
Δv ≥ 6.626E-34/(4π*1.67E-27*1E-15)

So the minimum speed for a proton confined to that particular space will be
= 31573672.2 m/s or 31573.6722 km/s or 31.5736722 Mm/s

b.)
A proton(I know it asks for E of a neutron but if I can do this general calculation then a neutron won't be much different) will have a minimum kinetic energy of

E = (1/2)mv^2
E = (1/2)(1.67E-27)(31573672.2)^2 = 8.324E-13 joules of energy

c.)
Is the same stuff except I'm dealing with an electron.

Is what I have correct?
 
Yes, except you've only got 3 decimal places of accuracy in the proton mass and this is an approximate calculation anyway. So writing 31573672.2 m/s is kind of silly. Round it off. And is Mm/s really a unit?
 
Dick said:
Yes, except you've only got 3 decimal places of accuracy in the proton mass and this is an approximate calculation anyway. So writing 31573672.2 m/s is kind of silly. Round it off. And is Mm/s really a unit?

Ok I'll round the number a bit since this is an approximate calculation. By the way, what prevents Mm/s from being a unit?
 
hover said:
Ok I'll round the number a bit since this is an approximate calculation. By the way, what prevents Mm/s from being a unit?

You mean mega-meters/sec? I'm not saying it COULDN'T be a unit, but I've never seen it used. If you used it in a problem there's a pretty good chance it would be taken for millimeters/sec.
 
Dick said:
You mean mega-meters/sec? I'm not saying it COULDN'T be a unit, but I've never seen it used. If you used it in a problem there's a pretty good chance it would be taken for millimeters/sec.

Yeah mega-meters/sec is what I meant by that. I've never seen it used like this either. I was really just playing with SI prefixes just for the hell of it. It does look cleaner though:

31500 km/s or 31.5*10^3 km/s
vs
31.5 Mm/s

It could be taken as millimeters too but generally that is written as mm not Mm.
 
hover said:
Yeah mega-meters/sec is what I meant by that. I've never seen it used like this either. I was really just playing with SI prefixes just for the hell of it. It does look cleaner though:

31500 km/s or 31.5*10^3 km/s
vs
31.5 Mm/s

It could be taken as millimeters too but generally that is written as mm not Mm.

Sure, I'd just stick with commonly used units. I don't see much usage of mega-meters.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
18K
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K